Going against what's plainly and clearly written in favor of an imagined complete opposite congressional "intent" would be appalling - how many congresscritters

Going against what's plainly and clearly written in favor of an imagined complete opposite congressional "intent" would be appalling - how many congresscritters voted for the bill as a compromise precisely because the "and" made the section more permissive? And what about the general principle that ambiguity is decided against the drafter? This isn't a contract, but surely a similar principle should apply to the direct removal of individual liberty by the government. If congress didn't actually do the diligence to enact the more restrictive ruleset, then it seems that the correct judgement is the one that gives the government a lesser ability to keep people in cages.