Metavid

Video archive of the US Congress

House Proceeding 04-28-09 on Apr 28th, 2009 :: 1:58:45 to 2:10:10
Total video length: 2 hours 59 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:141 Duration: 0:11:25 Discussion

Previous speech: Next speech:

Steve King

1:58:42 to 1:59:03( Edit History Discussion )

Steve King: our colleagues to the realization that the time for reform is now. i yield back the balance of my th the speaker's announced policy of january 6, 2009, the gentleman from iowa, mr. king, is recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the minority leader. . king: thank you, mr. speaker. very much appreciate the honor

Steve King

1:58:45 to 2:10:10( Edit History Discussion )
Speech By: Steve King

Steve King

1:59:04 to 1:59:24( Edit History Discussion )

Steve King: of addressing you here tonig on the floor representatives. there's an issue that comes to mind for me immediately, the reason that i have asked for some time tonight here in this special order in this hour privilege that we have. it is a disturbing factor that i

Steve King

1:59:25 to 1:59:46( Edit History Discussion )

Steve King: have experienced along with a number of others through the markup of the judiciary committee last week and that is this dramatic departure from the rule of law, the dramatic departure from the constitution, the dramatic departure from the understanding that criminal law in america would be focused on

Steve King

1:59:47 to 2:00:07( Edit History Discussion )

Steve King: overt acts not on the thoughts that we might divine would be within the heads of the perpetrators. i'm speaking specifically, mr. speaker, about the hate crimes legislation that has been pushed through the judiciary committee and then will arrive here on the floor of the house of representatives tomorrow

Steve King

2:00:08 to 2:00:29( Edit History Discussion )

Steve King: by the way the rule process that is taking place, there were a whole series of amendments offered in the judiciary committee, and those who watched the committee will know that the judiciary committee in the united states house of representatives is the most polarized committee on the hill. it's the committee that goes out and recruits the -- i'll say the most hard core, left-wing people

Steve King

2:00:30 to 2:00:50( Edit History Discussion )

Steve King: in this congress to advocate for the most hard-core left wing and i'll say sometimes unconstitutional, often illogical proposals that might come before this congress, ram through the judiciary committee, not without a legimate markup. i will concede that point to the chairman, mr. conyers.

Steve King

2:00:51 to 2:01:12( Edit History Discussion )

Steve King: many of us offered amendments. but a determination to vote down, shoot down, and defeat every constructive amendment that was offered beforthe judiciary committee on this so-called hate crimes legislation, mr. speaker. as the legislation finally on thursday after a full day wednesday and most of the day

Steve King

2:01:13 to 2:01:33( Edit History Discussion )

Steve King: thursday markup, after that legislation on so-called hate crimes passed judiciary committee, it went to the rules committee which met today, mr. speaker. and the rules committee's job is to also enhance something that is the responsibility of every chairman on this hill, responsibility of you, mr.

Steve King

2:01:34 to 2:01:54( Edit History Discussion )

Steve King: speaker, and the responsibility of all those who have a gavel in their hand. i have spent some time with a gavel in my hand, mr. speaker. the job of the chairman is to bring out the will of the group. it's not to impose the chair's will on the group to bring out the will of the group is the constitutional act of justice

Steve King

2:01:55 to 2:02:16( Edit History Discussion )

Steve King: that should come from the hand that holds the gavel. what happened instead? d perhaps, just perhaps hate crimes legislation flowed out of the judiciary committee reflecting the will of the judiciary committee, but when it is filtered through the rules committee, the rules committee that sits in judgment upon whether there will be amendments that are allowed to be offered

Steve King

2:02:17 to 2:02:38( Edit History Discussion )

Steve King: who are on the floor of the house of representatives or whether there will not, and which of those amendments might be offered, the has a profound responsibility to weigh the proposals and make a determination that this house can work in a expeditious fashion but still reflect the will of the united states house of representatives.

Steve King

2:02:39 to 2:03:00( Edit History Discussion )

Steve King: that will has been frustrated, mr. speaker, because the rules committee, i'm told, has ruled there will be no amendments on this hate crimes legislation. it will come to the floor under a closed rule with nol amendments allowed, only the amendments that were offered in the judiciary committee and no other member of congress, all those who do not sit on the judiciary committee l. have an opportunity

Steve King

2:03:01 to 2:03:22( Edit History Discussion )

Steve King: to try to perfect this ? gislation that they call hate crimes legislation. that i call, mr. speaker thought crimes legislation. that's at the core of our discussion here this evening, mr. speaker. and i'll submit that the will of this group, the will of the united states house of representatives, is directly

Steve King

2:03:23 to 2:03:44( Edit History Discussion )

Steve King: frustrat by the actions i believe are directed from the speaker's office, the actions of the chair of the rules committee. the actions of the majority members on the rules committee that have decided to shut down the amendments process and ram through a piece of legislation tomorrow with only 30 minutes allowed for allf the members of the united states house of representatives to voice their

Steve King

2:03:45 to 2:04:05( Edit History Discussion )

Steve King: objections here on the floor of the house of representatives. and no amendments allowed just a voice where more than 30 people lined up that would have less than a minute to add their words to this. there's no chance to sway the opinion of this body. the opinion of this body that has locked in on an idea we'll

Steve King

2:04:06 to 2:04:27( Edit History Discussion )

Steve King: have hate crimes legislation in america that punish the thoughts of people who may or may not be perpetrating crimes against folks because of their particular special protected status that would be created under this hate crimes legislation. i, mr. speaker, oppose and i defy the logic of the people

Steve King

2:04:28 to 2:04:49( Edit History Discussion )

Steve King: that woulded add vow date for such legislation -- advocate for such legislation the very idea we could divine what goes on in the heads of people when they commit crimes. i will argue th criminal law in western civilization has always been about the overt act. not about the covert act. about the overt act.

Steve King

2:04:50 to 2:05:11( Edit History Discussion )

Steve King: not about the thought, not about what goes on in the head of the perpetrator. certainly not goes on in the head of the victim. we recognize and have for millennium that the value of the victim is intrinsic in that each human life has a unique value, a unique value that is priceless and sacred whether it's a baby

Steve King

2:05:12 to 2:05:33( Edit History Discussion )

Steve King: that's just conceived a moment ago, or whether it's someone in the last days or hours of their live we are all measure that life equally. in fact, former governor of pennsylvania, robert casey, said, human life cannot be measured. it is the measure itself against which all other things are

Steve King

2:05:34 to 2:05:55( Edit History Discussion )

Steve King: weighed. and yet this hate crimes legislation would weigh it differently. it would weigh the life or the health or the physical well-being of an individual that fit within these special protected status, the status that might be be wrapped up in their sexual orientation, their gender identity, or their gender

Steve King

2:05:56 to 2:06:17( Edit History Discussion )

Steve King: itself of having a special status if it happens to fit the list of procliffities they believe should be protected status. when you start valuing one person's well-being, one person's life different than that of another, we have deviated dramatically from the essence of criminal law.

Steve King

2:06:18 to 2:06:38( Edit History Discussion )

Steve King: and started ourselves down a path by which we are not as the proponents of the bill -- will i say the gentlelady from madison, wisconsin, whom i specifically asked is this a crime committed and is it evaluated by whas in the head of the perpetrator or what's notice head of the victim? i think i might have misunderstood her but they

Steve King

2:06:39 to 2:06:59( Edit History Discussion )

Steve King: corrected me, it's what's in the head of the pertrator. all right. so if we are going to presume that a crime could be committed and we are going to enhance the penalty maybe 10 years, maybe as much as life in prison for kidnapping, for example, because we are going to judge what goes on in the mind of the perpetrator at the time they committed the crime and what

Steve King

2:07:00 to 2:07:21( Edit History Discussion )

Steve King: provided the incentive for committing that crime, we are evaluating here by law what goes on in the head of the perpetrator. but, mr. speaker, there's another component of this. this is what goes on in the head of the victim as well because the special protected status rest characteristics, not immutable characteristics. those characteristics that can

Steve King

2:07:22 to 2:07:43( Edit History Discussion )

Steve King: bendependently verified and cannot be willfully changed. no, mr. speaker, these characteristics are those mutable characteristics. those that reflect not just physicality of the victim but the attitude and the -- what goes on in the head of the victim. so for the first time if this legislation should become law,

Steve King

2:07:44 to 2:08:05( Edit History Discussion )

Steve King: the federal government will be punishing and acting upon legislation that presumes to be able to know what's in the mind of the perpetrator and what's in the mind of the victim. match those two things together and determine if a crime was committed and if so, how do enhance the penalty. this is a pi czar thing, mr. speaker. -- bizarre thing, mr. speaker.

Steve King

2:08:06 to 2:08:26( Edit History Discussion )

Steve King: this takes me back to the book "1984" by george orwell, written in 1949, where he wrote, and i summarize this because i don't exactly why the quote in front of me, we don't care about the overt act. we don't care about any overt act. what we care about is the thought. because if you can control the thought, you canontrol the overt act. so why would we care about the act itself when we can control

Steve King

2:08:27 to 2:08:47( Edit History Discussion )

Steve King: the thought. by the way we are not going to be satisfied if you just simply agree with us. you must do so willingly. we must bring your mind around to agree with us. when that point comes, there will be no more overt acts that we disagree with. and therefore we will have controlled the mind and by

Steve King

2:08:48 to 2:09:09( Edit History Discussion )

Steve King: controlling the minds, we have controlled the actions themselves. this is a bald-faced effort to enforce public affirmation for behaviors that have been considered to be historically abhorrent behaviors by the american psychological association, mr. speaker.

Steve King

2:09:10 to 2:09:31( Edit History Discussion )

Steve King: there are a long list of them. the list that i have is 547 of them long. as near i can determine they are all specially protected activities or thought processes that are protected under this hate crimes legislation, mr. speaker. . we tried mightily to amend the

Steve King

2:09:32 to 2:09:53( Edit History Discussion )

Steve King: bill and bring some sense to this idea that whatever the proclivity, it was going to be protected by a federal hate crimes law. we can't cross that line, mr. speaker. we've got to maintain criminal penalties for the overt act, not for the thought, because we can't know what goes on in the mind of the perpetrator, and we

Steve King

2:09:54 to 2:10:10( Edit History Discussion )

Steve King: can't know what goes on in the mind of the victim. mr. speaker, that open this is subject matter up and i recognize that there are some very effective members of the house of representatives that would like to address this subject matter. no matter how focused they may

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