I understand the question. They passed out with an understanding between the vice chairman of the committee and me that we would vote on them separately but would move TPA and TAA--which most Republicans hate--we would move them together, and then we would move the third one, and then we would move the fourth one. It was supposed to be done that way because everybody knew that putting the Schumer amendment on the one bill would not be acceptable in the House and would not be acceptable to the President, and that is the problem here. We all are prepared to have a vote on that bill, but the agreement was that we would vote individually on all four bills. Finally, we agreed to do TPA and TAA because your side was concerned about whether this side would allow TAA to go through. There never had been a question that we were willing to do that even though most of us hate that bill.
Orrin Hatch: “I understand the question. They passed out with an understanding between the vice chairman of the committee and me that…”
On the recordMay 12, 2015
Share
More from Orrin Hatch
Sep 25, 2018
Many of us on the committee have already expressed our concerns about the administration's heavy reliance on tariffs.
Oct 1, 2018
Having a confirmed Commissioner and sustained leadership will benefit the Social Security Administration.
Sep 18, 2018
I know of no further debate on the bill. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there further debate? Hearing none, the bill having been read the third time, the question is, Shall the bill pass? The bill (H.R. 1551), as amended, was passed.
Sep 25, 2018
I intend to focus this morning on the investigation that was self-initiated by the Department of Commerce under section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 to determine whether imports of automobiles and automotive parts threaten to…





