Metavid

Video archive of the US Congress

House Proceeding 03-22-10 on Mar 22nd, 2010 :: 2:54:40 to 3:14:40
Total video length: 3 hours 36 minutes Stream Tools: Stream Overview | Edit Time

Note: MetaVid video transcripts may contain inaccuracies, help us build a more perfect archive

Download OptionsEmbed Video

Views:47 Duration: 0:20:00 Discussion

Previous speech: Next speech:

Steve King

2:54:37 to 2:54:59( Edit History Discussion )

Steve King: hunch they aren't happy what we have done last night. i yield back to the the gentleman from iowa. mr. king: i thank the gentleman from texas and i know he had trouble sleeping last night. he may be able to get caught tonight and rest a little. i do not believe that we are going to be forgetting this.

Steve King

2:54:40 to 3:35:50( Edit History Discussion )
Speech By: Steve King

Steve King

2:55:00 to 2:55:20( Edit History Discussion )

Steve King: i'm not the only one that the first order of business this issued a bill draft request to repeal this legislation that passed the house last night, the senate version of the bill. and it's taped more than one of us have stepped forward to do that. i'll continue to work on that cause and working to have

Steve King

2:55:21 to 2:55:41( Edit History Discussion )

Steve King: legislation that n repeal the senate version of the bill. and that can be converted into a discharge petition, that can then bring a repeal to the floor of the house. there are 212 house members that voted against it. that means - if they'll stick to their conviction and there was one resignatn last night.

Steve King

2:55:42 to 2:56:02( Edit History Discussion )

Steve King: so tha means we ave seven more. if all of those would sign on to that and seven would have a conversion, we would be able to bring a repeal to the house. that is one of my eforts and am committed to that. going back to dr. burgess' comments with regard to cost and

Steve King

2:56:03 to 2:56:24( Edit History Discussion )

Steve King: he said the doctors' fix has to be in the area of $360 billion. and i spoke of the half a trillion cut in medicare reimbursement rates as part of that bill. that's $500 billion. and tax increases in their aggregate, $569.2 billion. that total, things that aren't

Steve King

2:56:25 to 2:56:48( Edit History Discussion )

Steve King: in this bill that changed the overall cost of the bill are $1 ,429,29,00,0000 that if they were designed to inform the american people would have shifted the balance of that

Steve King

2:56:49 to 2:57:10( Edit History Discussion )

Steve King: scoring from a deficit reduction of $10 billion to deficit increase to $1.4 trillion. so we would be in that area, 1,300 billion is what the additional cost of that is

Steve King

2:57:11 to 2:57:32( Edit History Discussion )

Steve King: massed by the cuts in medicare, tax increases, and by the necessity to pass the doctors' fix. and the net, that would be the net deficit that was created by this bill when you subtract those numbers works out to be $1 .3 trillion.

Steve King

2:57:33 to 2:57:54( Edit History Discussion )

Steve King: all of this, al of this to solve the problem that the president has identified as us ending too much money on health care. we spend too much money on health care and the economy is in a downward spiral. and we can't fix the economy unless we first fix health care. the problem with health care is we spend too much money and the president's solution is spending

Steve King

2:57:55 to 2:58:15( Edit History Discussion )

Steve King: a lot more. speaker pelosi's solution is spend a lot more. so that's what got done last night. the american people end up with a huge liability that goes on to our children, grandchildren and bies yet born wil be paying interest on the debt that shows no sign to be reduced any time

Steve King

2:58:16 to 2:58:36( Edit History Discussion )

Steve King: within the calculations of the people that are in control of this control, that being the white house, the gavel here in the house and the gavel in the united states senate. . when mr. burgess: talks about happily ever hand after, i don't any if there is a happily ever after --

Steve King

2:58:37 to 2:58:58( Edit History Discussion )

Steve King: ever after had in america, bureau we're living with a once upon a time, mr. speaker. i want to roll uback to the stupak amendment and what happened here in the house last night. the stupakamendment was brought forward in the weeks before the november 7 first passage of the house version of the bill. it was driven, i think, by the best merits of seeking to

Steve King

2:58:59 to 2:59:21( Edit History Discussion )

Steve King: prohibit american taxpayers from having to fund abortions, i'd like to prohibit abortions but if we can prohibit to have taxpayers fund abortions, at least we're maintaining -- main stain -- maintaining the current status quo. that changed last night, mr. speaker. the stupak amendment was motivated and designed to

Steve King

2:59:22 to 2:59:42( Edit History Discussion )

Steve King: prevent americans from having to pay for the elimination of innocent unborn human life. th was properly motivated and it was very hard work here in this congress. every republican supported constitute pack amendment, 64 democrats voted for the stupak amendment, every one got at least some cover to be able to

Steve King

2:59:43 to 3:00:03( Edit History Discussion )

Steve King: say, i am pro-life. and that went on from november 7 this cov of being pro-life democrats, on until last night, madam speaker. and now it's a legitimate question to ask, is there such a thing as a pro-life democrat? or was it always a political

Steve King

3:00:04 to 3:00:25( Edit History Discussion )

Steve King: position that was con drived to posture, to -- con drived to pasture, to -- contrived to posture. i'm having trouble at this point finding a real pro-life democrat . i'm sure some them in their most private world do care a lot

Steve King

3:00:26 to 3:00:46( Edit History Discussion )

Steve King: about ending the destruction of innocent unborn human life. but after the stupak amendment, after the long negotiations that took place, after the events that took place yesterday of congressman stupak in one room, the pro-choice people in another room, shuttle diplomacy going back and forth and finally about

Steve King

3:00:47 to 3:01:08( Edit History Discussion )

Steve King: 4:00 yesterday congressman stupak held a press conference and revealed that the stupak 12, the dozen, that had pledged that they would hold out to defend innocent unborn human lives and oppose federal funding o abortion decided that they had found a solution that would take them off of the pressure hook

Steve King

3:01:09 to 3:01:29( Edit History Discussion )

Steve King: and out of the pressure cooker that was being put there by the speaker. and we have to believe that the stupak 12 would have stuck together, this anti-life, anti-liberty bill would have failed last night. but it didn't. now what was the rationale that came before the stupak

Steve King

3:01:30 to 3:01:50( Edit History Discussion )

Steve King: conference yesterday? and the stupak dozen, i point out that we still don't know who they all are. we probably know who some of them are. we don't know who they all are. and you can't count votes and you can't count on votes in this united states congress or any legislative body unless the people that are on the list are

Steve King

3:01:51 to 3:02:12( Edit History Discussion )

Steve King: public. if they say, i will be a no on the senate version of the bill unless there is a fix that will put real pro-life language in it, if they'll step up at the press conference and take their position and make that pledge before god and man, you can generally count on them. a lot of them were pledged by

Steve King

3:02:13 to 3:02:33( Edit History Discussion )

Steve King: congressman stupak but they were none, madam speaker. and i never -- unanimous, madam speaker. and i never believe that an unanimous oath stuck for anything because they coul always flip and vote the other way and when pinned down later on say, i was never won of the stupak dozen. so you -- one of the stupak dozen. so you had the option. those whose names didn't leak

Steve King

3:02:34 to 3:02:55( Edit History Discussion )

Steve King: out into the press, they had the option to vote yes or no. if they vopetted no on the bill because it didn't have pro-life protections in it, then after the final vote they could always say, well, i stood up for innocent unborn human life. i was one of the stupak dozen. but if they voted yes, madam speaker, and when they were

Steve King

3:02:56 to 3:03:17( Edit History Discussion )

Steve King: accused later on of flipping their position and not sticking with their publicly announced convictions on pro-life, perhaps, they could always say, well, i was thever part of the stupak dozen. i really didn't make that pledge or that oath. i didn't tend to keep that, i didn't -- wasn't part of that deal. so don't write me into this presuming that i flipped positions and didn't stick to my convictions because i never

Steve King

3:03:18 to 3:03:38( Edit History Discussion )

Steve King: announced my convictions. that's what goes onhen people who are supposedly part of a coalition remain unanimous and are not -- their names do not become public, their public statements are not part of the record and so therefore they can vote any old way they want to vote. and always hide from the accountability. they don't have to give their word, they don't have to keep

Steve King

3:03:39 to 3:04:00( Edit History Discussion )

Steve King: their word. and for months the stupak dozen remained unanimous and now we have to wonder, was there a democrats on that dozen, by the way, was there a single one that had the courage of the convictions that put up a vote to defend innocent unborn human

Steve King

3:04:01 to 3:04:22( Edit History Discussion )

Steve King: life or did they all find a way to slip into the excuse of the president of the united states is going to sign an executive order that will take the stupak language and make it law of the land? that's the summary of the stupak conference yesterday as i heard it. the president's executive order makes protection of innocent

Steve King

3:04:23 to 3:04:43( Edit History Discussion )

Steve King: unborn human life from the assault of american taxpayer dollars, pro-life american taxpayer dollars, protected by an executive order of the president of the united states. now, i have to believe that a duping has taken place here. we're the people that have to take an oath and we're glad to do it, an oath to up hold the constitution of the united states.

Steve King

3:04:44 to 3:05:05( Edit History Discussion )

Steve King: we take that oath right down here on the floor together. and i carry the family bible to take my oath on that bible, to uphold this constitution of the united states. and we're upholdg a constitution of what we understand the text of the constitution to mean and what it was understood to

Steve King

3:05:06 to 3:05:27( Edit History Discussion )

Steve King: mean at the time of its ratificatn. it cannot be anything else, it cannot be a living, breathing, growing, moving, changing, morphing organism. the constitution has to mean what it says. if it doesn't mean what it says, it's no guarantee whatsoever. it's simply a document that allows the judge or manipulting

Steve King

3:05:28 to 3:05:49( Edit History Discussion )

Steve King: attorney to manipulate society however they choose to do so. or the constitution could just become instead a shield that an activist judge could hold up an say, hold it, don't criticize me, that's the constitution, it was my job to interpret it as a growing, breathing, moving, changing, morphing document and because society has changed, the

Steve King

3:05:50 to 3:06:10( Edit History Discussion )

Steve King: constitution has to adapt to it. that is nuts. it is nuts to think the constitution has any value. if we're going to put it into the hands of an activist judge and have him turn it into something that's malable, that they can shape it in hair thats -- hands however they would want to, there wouldn't be any reason for a constitution if it was growing, moving, changing, morphing.

Steve King

3:06:11 to 3:06:31( Edit History Discussion )

Steve King: it's got to mean, the text of it has got to mean what it was understood to mean at the time of the ratification of the basic document, the bill of rights or each of the amendments in their time as they came through. and the founding fathers put provisions in place so if they weren't satisfied with this constitution, its text and its orge understanding then we

Steve King

3:06:32 to 3:06:53( Edit History Discussion )

Steve King: could amend it. fair amount of wisdom. it's a high bar. but still it needs to be a high bar to amend the constitution because this is our guarantee. and to think that we would have members of this united states congress at this very high and presumably well educated, well informed and sfift cadded --

Steve King

3:06:54 to 3:07:15( Edit History Discussion )

Steve King: sophisticated level, it would take an oath to uphold this constitution, each two years as they are seated in this congress , and believe somehow this congress, this constitution doesn't mean what it says, that there really isn't what you'd call a separation of powers, that the executive, the legislative and the judicial branches of government somehow are not defined specifically in

Steve King

3:07:16 to 3:07:38( Edit History Discussion )

Steve King: here with our individual duties, all legislative powers are vested in the congress. they're vested -- not vested in the president of the united states. article 1, section 1, all legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in a congress of the united states which shall consist of a senate

Steve King

3:07:39 to 3:08:00( Edit History Discussion )

Steve King: and a house of representatives. all legislative powers, madam speaker. and yet, congressman stupak and the other 11 of the stupak dozen found it conveniento believe that this doesn't mean what it says, that a president of the united states can amd the

Steve King

3:08:01 to 3:08:23( Edit History Discussion )

Steve King: legislation of the land, the law of the land by executive order? who could dream of such a thing? what kind of a country could we have if the president could amend our legislation, the federal code, by executive order? any president could come in then on a whim and amend the very reason deliberations of the

Steve King

3:08:24 to 3:08:44( Edit History Discussion )

Steve King: house and the senate, that we've co sent the document to the president of the united states president could then just simply sign an executive order to chan it, if the president can could to do that why didn't he just -- can do that why didn't he just write the entire obamacare package?

Steve King

3:08:45 to 3:09:05( Edit History Discussion )

Steve King: if he can run this country by executive order, you don't need a legislative branch, come together to appropriate money. this is the kind of thinking that subverts our constitution. this initiated and promised from the president of the united states who used to teach

Steve King

3:09:06 to 3:09:28( Edit History Discussion )

Steve King: constitutional law at the university of chicago as aned a junction professor. i'll just read this again in case we forget what article 1, section 1 says. you start off simply rife after the preamble. all legislative powers here in granted shall be vested in a congress of the united states which shall consist of a senate

Steve King

3:09:29 to 3:09:50( Edit History Discussion )

Steve King: and house of representatives. the gentleman from michigan, the 11 other gentlemen and gentleladies that are part of the stupak 12 found something that was the best deal they could find, to let them do what they were probably willing to do for a long time before they find little -- finally capitulate and

Steve King

3:09:51 to 3:10:12( Edit History Discussion )

Steve King: at's vote for this -- capitulated and that's vote for this socialized medicine -- socialized bill. so they'll migrate what political power is instead of standing on their convictions. how could this be? the president of the united states will sign an executive

Steve King

3:10:13 to 3:10:34( Edit History Discussion )

Steve King: order that alters the legislative lanage of the united states congress. what utter arrogance on the part of the white house, what utter naivety at best on the part of the members of this congress to buy into such a thing. madampeaker, i'm not without experience in this category. i didn't just open up the

Steve King

3:10:35 to 3:10:55( Edit History Discussion )

Steve King: constitution and read article 1, section 1. i have a deep and long history with defending the constitution and the separation of powers and in fact as a state senator i exercised that at some expense to myself and my family.

Steve King

3:10:56 to 3:11:17( Edit History Discussion )

Steve King: as a state senator i took an oath to uphold the constitution of the united states and the constitution of the state of iowa. . sometime in 199, i received a fax and i don't know where it

Steve King

3:11:18 to 3:11:38( Edit History Discussion )

Steve King: came from, but it was a photo copy of an article written in "the washington blade" and it said, the governor had signed an executive order that granted special protective status for

Steve King

3:11:39 to 3:12:01( Edit History Discussion )

Steve King: gender identity and it was -- it took get credit for that executive order advancing the special rights of those who read "the washington blade" newspaper. it seemed that someone had expected that would be sent out here and posted in the newspaper and nobody in iowa would have

Steve King

3:12:02 to 3:12:24( Edit History Discussion )

Steve King: picked up on it but someone cut it out and faxed it to me. i read the article and checked the iowa administrative buletin and there on page 632, i found the executive order. now the governor had had a pres conference that day and talked about several other actions on

Steve King

3:12:25 to 3:12:45( Edit History Discussion )

Steve King: his part, but didn't talk about the executive order, granting special status. and i went to our attorneys and i said this is a violation of the sprigs of powers. i belive he is legislating by executive order and i believe that is a constitutional violation. and the attorneys on our side of

Steve King

3:12:46 to 3:13:06( Edit History Discussion )

Steve King: this analyzed it and said no, you're wrong. this is very carefully written and artfully drafted in such a way that it isn't a violation of the constitution and this executive order wil stand. it didn't make sense to me and they couldn't explain it to me. it isn't because i can't understand it, it might be they

Steve King

3:13:07 to 3:13:27( Edit History Discussion )

Steve King: don't either. i sat down at the word processer and put the language in the iowa code. i typed it in so i had the words to work with and took executive order number 7 on page 632 and i patched that into the code of the civil rights code, iowa law,

Steve King

3:13:28 to 3:13:49( Edit History Discussion )

Steve King: just like our federal code here, federal law, and what struck out words in the iowa code, put strike throughs in them and underlines in them and i had a document that showed me what the code of iowa would read like if that executive order were allowed to stand. andt was clear to me that the

Steve King

3:13:50 to 3:14:10( Edit History Discussion )

Steve King: governor had legislated by executive order and aded two more categories to protected status and was patterned after the civil rights act and the code. it was clear to me that the governor had legislated by executive order.

Steve King

3:14:11 to 3:14:33( Edit History Discussion )

Steve King: i didn't have anybody who agreed with me, buti agreed with it. t i wrote up an analysis and i sent it out to about a dozen of people out there whose judgment i trusted and asked them to give me an opinion. and that was on a thursday night. before i got an opinion back, i

Steve King

3:14:34 to 3:14:54( Edit History Discussion )

Steve King: was driving down the road at 15:15 listening to one o our radio talk show hosts in iowa, who happens to be one of the people that is talking on who radio and that is the original station where ronald reagan had a microphone.

Personal tools

MetaVid is a non-profit project of UC Santa Cruz and the Sunlight Foundation. Learn more About MetaVid

The C-SPAN logo and other servicemarks that may be found in video content are the property of their respective trademark holders. None of these trademark holders are affiliated with Metavid