Let me try to bring the debate back to the issue here. The issue before us is not to rehash or redo the State legislative enactment; that is the law of the land in the State of Wisconsin. What we are trying to do here, what we are talking about is process. There is a process for when States ask for waivers. Like it or not, that is the process that has been used. So, what the Republican proposal today does is cut out the public's input into this process. Do not give me this baloney about the bureaucrats and everything else. The 30 days is so the public, and I will give you some of the names who have asked for this opportunity from Wisconsin and from out of Wisconsin, but they just want an opportunity to be heard. Why are we cutting that out? What do we have to fear?
Gerald Kleczka: “Let me try to bring the debate back to the issue here. The issue before us is not to rehash or redo the State…”
Editor's note · Context
Addressing the importance of public input in the waiver process during a debate.
Share
More from Gerald Kleczka
the Administration rushed into this war before they understood the consequences. Nearly half a year prior to seeking out a United Nations mandate and two months before Congress even considered the resolution authorizing force, the war…
Mr. Speaker, I really do not know where to start, to start answering some of the critics and the proponents of this legislation. This bill started out about a week ago or so in the Committee on Ways and Means, which I serve on, and the…
I rise in disgust of yesterday's terrorist acts, and in strong support of the resolution before us. The cowardly acts of terrorism carried out yesterday against fellow Americans are sickening and unparalleled since the surprise attack on…
while our country continues to be a staunch ally and long-time friend to Israel, this resolution does nothing to bring about a ceasefire that might lead to a lasting peace. Our role should be drawn these bitter enemies closer together, not…





