Restoring Americans' Healthcare Freedom Reconciliation Act

Floor Speech

Date: Dec. 3, 2015
Location: Washington, DC
Issues: Taxes Guns

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. REID. Mr. President, I have great respect for the senior Senator from Texas, a former member of the Texas Supreme Court. How he could make an argument like this is beyond my ability to comprehend.

This Republican amendment ties the hands of law enforcement. This amendment doesn't keep terrorists from getting guns. It simply delays their efforts for up to 72 hours. This amendment means that all a lawyer needs to do is gum up the works for a short time and an FBI terrorist suspect can walk away with a firearm--a legal firearm. That would be relatively easy to do. There are a lot of lawyers in this Chamber. Courts can't do virtually anything in 72 hours. How long does it take to shoot up a school, a mall, someone's home? Fifteen minutes? Five minutes? You could be on the terrorist watch list, go buy a gun, and let the time go by.

This is outrageous that people would try to run from this amendment. If you are on a terrorist watch list, you shouldn't be able to buy a gun. This would allow a terrorist to not only buy a gun but keep it for up to 72 hours.

The second aspect of this amendment is equally alarming. It takes money away from law enforcement. Here again, we are voting on something again and again. We already voted down this Vitter amendment, sanctuary cities bill, last month, which strips all local law enforcement from vital Federal community policing grants.

I am using a little bit of my leader time right now.

This strips local law enforcement from vital Federal community policing grants, targeted public safety and to build community trust. It cuts community development block grants, and the purpose of this is to ensure affordable housing and provide services to the most vulnerable in our communities.

Very quickly, this amendment takes the FBI out of the equation when it comes to keeping guns away from terrorists, and it takes away from local law enforcement agencies, threatening public safety. Is it any wonder that this is an anti-law enforcement amendment?

The legislation is opposed by the Fraternal Order of Police, Major Cities Chiefs Association, United States Conference of Mayors, and many others. This is a dangerous amendment. First of all, to use Senator Kennedy, let him be on the watch list. He is not going to go buy a gun and hurt anybody. These ridiculous assertions are just that--ridiculous. We are trying to say if you are on a watch list as being a terrorist, you shouldn't be able to buy a gun. It is as simple as that. My friend the Senator from California will lay this out. She has been the leader on guns in this Chamber for two decades.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. REID. Mr. President, there is nothing unconstitutional about keeping a terrorist from buying a gun. That is what this is all about. Do we want people on a terrorist watch list to go buy a gun? The answer is no. That is what this amendment is all about. The Senator from California will explain it.

I raise a point of order against this ridiculous amendment, and I ask for the yeas and nays.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. REID. There is no shortage of contradictions today from my Republican friends. The first amendment was called, ``If you like what you have, you can keep it.'' A couple of hours later, the same Republicans came back and voted to strip the health care for 22 million Americans.

In one of the few bipartisan moments today, 90 Senators voted to remove the provision that would restart the Cadillac tax in 2025. Yet minutes later, the Republican leader offered the pending substitute amendment to put that provision back in.

Do they really believe those who oppose the Cadillac tax will not recognize that they voted with them and then immediately reversed themselves and voted against them? I am offering them a chance to correct the record.

My amendment will again remove the provision that restarts the Cadillac tax in 2025. I urge all Senators, particularly the 90 who just voted yes, to support this amendment.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT


Source
arrow_upward