I agree. I want to be sure that the amendment to be included will be Senator Portman's amendment that corresponds precisely to the bills that were considered by the Judiciary Committee. Adding chemicals to schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act has serious consequences and is not a step that we should undertake without careful consideration. Do you understand that the consent to include Senator Portman's amendment is not consent to further amend the Controlled Substances Act, that it is limited to these chemicals and matters contained in that amendment, and that have been considered and approved by the Senate Judiciary Committee?
Share
More from Patrick Leahy
a continuing resolution to March 10 is short-sighted and wholly unnecessary. It imperils our national security, and it ignores the real pain and consequences of inflation. Without funding from a full-year omnibus appropriations bill, the…
reserving the right to object, and I will, but let me explain why. The bill offered by my colleague on the other side of the aisle is shortsighted and premature. We have been working on this omnibus for months. I would have been happy to…
we have so many things going on in Washington these days, with just about everything from budgetary matters to wrapping up this session of the Congress. I was delighted today to take a step back and, in my role as President pro tempore…
I have been a member of the Senate Agriculture Committee for 48 years, since I was elected in 1974. I have helped to write nine farm bills, and I have overseen the creation of programs that have helped farmers, food systems, and consumers…





