Jim Sensenbrenner: “what the two proponents of the motion to recommit are arguing is something that simply is not going to happen. If the…”

“what the two proponents of the motion to recommit are arguing is something that simply is not going to happen. If the father of a young girl impregnates her as a result of an incestuous act, filing a lawsuit will expose that crime and the evidence that would have to be submitted by the defendants would end up very clearly showing that that father did commit a crime. What would happen as a result of this bill not passing, with or without the amendment, is that the father who did commit that crime of incest would want to destroy the evidence of that crime without alerting the authorities. This bill prevents that, and the bill requires the alerting of appropriate authorities to protect young girls from future abuse. Those who oppose this bill and are supporting this motion to recommit would doom the victims of rape and incest to continued abuse. Supporters of this bill want to prevent that abuse from continuing. Vote down the motion to recommit, and vote for the bill. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, the previous question is ordered on the motion to recommit. There was no objection. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion to recommit. The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that the noes appeared to have it.”