Lloth
-
Posts
969 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
11
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Store
Gallery
Blogs
Events
Downloads
Posts posted by Lloth
-
-
Mr. President.
As the Gentleman could potentially put me in a position, as a certified social worker, to be required to report the progressive wing of my party as potential child abusers for investigation in accord with District Law, I will be leaving the Chamber until a vote is called.
I yield.
(Turns and storms out)
-
Mr. President,
I put before my colleagues the question of why are we still fighting terrorism more than 15 years after 9/11?
I have an answer, although it will take a while...and the members of this chamber may prefer to rush something out for good optics instead of actually doing something.
I suggest the viewing of this video from the American Enterprise Institute.
I yield.
-
Mr. President,
I recall one of the teachings of my foster father.
Do not get into an argument with a jackass. People might not be able to tell the difference.
I yield.
-
1
-
-
Mr. President,
I don't recall sugesting any state did not recognize that a live survivor of an abortion attempt had the full legal protection of the law. However, that does not mean that such legislation is not an overreach of Federal authority.
That members of both sides acknowledge this is not a problem anywhere at this time suggests it is a solution in search of a problem. Unless, perchance, there is a movement I am unaware of to allow post-birth abortions?
(pause)
Do as you will; this is not sufficiently stupid for me to expend further energy upon.
I yield.
-
-
AYE
S.18 Northern Virginia Extension Metrorail Act
NAY
Co-Sponsor
S.49 Human Rights for Girls Act
-
Senator Levin Supports Presidential Veto of Investing in Opportunity Act
WASHINGTON(PRWIRE) - Senator Bion Levin of Michigan took up a surprisingly full throated support of the President's veto of the Investing in Opportunity Act. The legislation, passed with major support from both parties, is intended to aid economically distressed zones through the deferral of capital gains taxes to encourage long term investment.
"The legislation would help low income communities", the Senator noted after reviewing the President's veto message, "but it would gentrify them and force the residents out in the process. Forcing the residents of low income areas out is not a solution, unless your concern is property tax values."
The Senator has already taken to the Senate Floor to speak against the override, and is reportedly cajoling colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support the veto.
Copies of the speech and this press release are available from the Senator's Communications DIrector.
- 30 -
-
Josh Earnest, Director of Communications
-
-
-
Mr. President,
I ask to amend the bill by adding the following, with Sec 2 updated appropriately.
TITLE V - DEFINITIONS AND POLICIES
Sec. 501 Terrorism is defined for purposes of this legislation per 28 C.F.R. Section 0.85: "the unlawful use of force and violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives"
I yield.
-
-
CS with tentative intent to amend
-
Mr. President,
The Gentleman is welcomed to his opinion. As for Judges, some of the most activist judges were appointed by Republican Presidents. I note the Warren Court as a minor example.
I yield.
-
-
25 minutes ago, SWMissourian said:
Mr. President,
The objection by the Senator from Michigan is ridiculous. In no part of the bill are state laws mentioned. We are not requiring states to adopt a definition of legal personhood. Section 2 simply clarified it solely under the laws of the United States—the federal government.
I yield.
Mr. President,
The Gentleman clearly has more faith in the Federal Judiciary to interpret our work as intended then I do.
I yield.
-
1 hour ago, SWMissourian said:
Mr. President,
What authority of the states does this legislation intrude on? I think it’s ridiculous to contend, for instance, that the federal government can’t assert protection of rights under its own laws by clarifying legal personhood. The United States federal government has a right to clarify it’s own laws.
I yield.
Mr. President,
I believe the Gentleman has hit the nail on the head in that "legal personhood" is an aspect of contract law, which is most definitely a state prerogative.
I would also note that, if we could define legal personhood so easily, we would not have the various human life amendments proposed over the last few decades. There would simply be bills defining life as beginning at conception.
The annoyance of a Federal system is recognizing we do not have carte blanche.
I yield.
-
Mr. President,
In reading over the legislation, I am a bit stymied. I do not think any sensible person would disagree with providing necessary medical support in the event an abortion attempt results in a live birth.
However, if I understand the legislation properly, Section 2 defines the newborn as a legal person with all the rights, privileges, etc thereof.
Does this not intrude into the authorities of the individual States? Should this clause be limited to Federal Territories and the District, which are under the direct authority of the Federal Government?
I yield.
-
-
Mr. President,
To ask a question which may sound a bit insane at first, what is a terrorist?
While it could be argued this is obvious, the legislation fails to define the term. Would Menachan Begin been considered a terrorist in 1946 with the bombing of the King David Hotel by the Irgun? Would he STILL have been considered a terrorist in 1956?
Does it matter why an individual or organization carry out attacks we see as terroristic?
Does it matter if we are supporting them, like with the Contras in Nicaragua?
What if the Nicaraguan government had launched terrorist attacks in return for our sponsoring the terrorist attacks of the Contras?
I do not oppose the intent of this legislation at all, but I think we need to clarify a few things, possibly with regards to our own black operations.
I yield.
-
Mr. President,
Could the Gentleman from Louisiana please explain the justification for the tax on unimproved property, essentially, if I understand the bill correctly, and why we are cutting Corporate and Personal income taxes at a time when the deficit many Republicans harp on is so high?
I yield.
-
2
-
-
Go where the money is. New York and Los Angeles are good, but so would be San Francisco/Silicon Valley.
-
1
-
-
Because it is half cooked; I have been buried with work and other demands, so I have not been on since my last edit.
I(D) was election acceptable, so thought it might still be. No problem; I'll make the necessary change.
-
Female 5
Asian. 15
Buddhist 20
Lesbian, not openly 5
Upper Class, 5
Bachelor's, Social Work, Michigan State University. 0
Master's in Community Development, Michigan State University, 10
Social Worker, 5(10)
3 terms, Michigan House of Representatives, 6(12)
Total 82
Affiliation: Democratic - Liberal
avatar: Bee Nguyen of Georgia
R9 Leaves of Absence
in Other
Posted
I am pretty much out from Sat the 24th through Sunday the 8th or so due to work. This may be subject to extension, as work tends to have lots of last minute scheduling.
(By last minute, sometimes yesterday)