Replies

(House of Representatives - July 27, 1999)
[Page: H6431] GPO's PDF

--- (Mr. STRICKLAND asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. STRICKLAND. Mr. Speaker, it troubles me that sometimes in this Chamber we stand and say things that we ought not to say. We criticize people that we have no right to criticize.

We recently voted to condemn a scientific study and an organization, an organization that has done as much as any organization in this country to fight child abuse.

I wonder how many of us read the study before we were willing to vote to say that the methodology was flawed. I wonder how many of us were technically competent to make that decision.

I believe that we ought to observe the Ten Commandments. One of those Commandments says, you ought not to bear false witness against your neighbor.

When we say things about an organization or about an individual scientist that are untrue or unsubstantiated, in my judgment, we have violated that Commandment.

We ought to have the decency not to vote to condemn something until we know what it is we are voting to condemn

Ok - here's my question, based on the following:

On 5/12/1999, it was referred to the House Committee on Education and the Workforce

On 6/4/1999, it was referred to the Subcommittee on Early Childhood, Youth and Families.

On 7/12/1999 at 2:17PM, it was moved to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution.

At 2:25, the chair announced further proceedings would be postponed

At 6:33, it was "considered as unfinished business"

At 6:40, the vote occurred.

1) Was Strickland on either the committee or subcommittee?

2) If not, is it possible that he may not have received a copy of the bill or the study prior to 7/12/1999 to read? If not, he could be right - many would not have a clue what they were really voting on, and it certainly flew through in record time. Lord knows congress votes on things they don't read far too often...