4 ms·
In context, he's not describing a compromise, he's talking about a 'wrecking amendment'. Adding something absurd to a bill. The difference is that the person
by ozr 3y ago
In context, he's not describing a compromise, he's talking about a 'wrecking amendment'. Adding something absurd to a bill. The difference is that the person adding the amendment doesn't actually want or expect their amendment to be passed.
Wikipedia has a fun example:
> The Wyoming House of Representatives Committee of the Whole amended House Bill 0085, a proposal to study the state's emergency preparedness, in order to kill the bill. The amendment would have required the state to consider purchasing an aircraft carrier (even though Wyoming is a landlocked state), purchasing fighter jets, establishing a military, initiating a draft, and creating a currency.
- oivey 3y agoNo, he definitely is not. Painting every bill Republicans have blocked as having a wrecking amendment is beyond silly. He’s describing a refusal to compromise.