One Vision, One Voice
image image image image

In the News...


The Guest Column: The Latest News from Washington

Dear Friend,

We are working hard in Washington and in the district for the people of Mississippi. We are happy to keep you up-to-date with the most recent news from our office. Please feel free to forward this email to your friends and family and encourage them to SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER.

The Equal Rights Attack on our Constitution

During the impeachment debate, you may have heard Speaker Nancy Pelosi reference Benjamin Franklin’s quote, “A Republic, if we can keep it.” She was referring to the responsibility of the House to uphold the Constitution in an attempt to legitimize the Democrats’ impeachment. If you thought it was ironic that Nancy Pelosi was talking about upholding the Constitution, you were not alone. But she and her Democratic colleagues have quickly returned to subverting the foundation of our Democracy by violating our Constitution while raising serious pro-life concerns.

Last week, House Democrats passed a bill that would remove the deadline for ratifying the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA), a proposed constitutional amendment first introduced in 1923. Almost 50 years later, Congress passed the ERA in 1972 and set a seven-year deadline for ratification by the states. In order to amend the Constitution, two-thirds of the state legislatures, or 38 states, must approve an amendment. When the deadline arrived in 1979, 35 states had ratified the ERA and five of those states had voted to rescind their ratification, for a net of 30 states, failing to meet the standards laid out in the Constitution for ratification of a Constitutional Amendment. Congress approved an extension of the ratification deadline to 1982, but the requisite number of states still did not adopt the Amendment in time. However, in recent years, three more states have ratified the Amendment: Nevada on March 22, 2017; Illinois on May 30, 2018; and Virginia on January 15, 2020, making the total number of states to ratify the Amendment 33, short of the required 38 states. As it stands, the ERA is almost 100 years old, over 30 years past its deadline, and it has never met the requirements to amend the Constitution.

Democrats are attempting to ignore our Constitution, the failed attempts to ratify the ERA in the past, and the fives states’ decisions to rescind the Amendment by passing H.J. Res. 79, which is the legislation that would remove the deadline for ERA ratification. This effort by the Democrats would not pass judicial scrutiny. Nancy Pelosi and her new Democratic Party are so out of touch with the republic that our founders envisioned that even left-leaning scholars are weighing in against the controversial move to upend our Constitution. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg recently indicated that the only way to move forward would be “starting over again collecting the necessary states to ratify it.” Justice Ginsberg stated, “I would like to see a new beginning [of the ERA]. I’d like it to start over.”

One of the primary concerns with the ERA is the impact it would have on the pro-life movement. If the ERA is adopted, it would be unconstitutional to legislate against the right for a woman to obtain an abortion, effectively nullifying all of the great work of the states to enact strong pro-life policies and protect the lives of our unborn children. Additionally, the ERA could permanently allow taxpayer-funded abortions, nullify the Hyde Amendment that prohibits federal funding for abortions, remove state restrictions on tax-payer funded abortions, eliminate the ban on partial-birth abortions, remove protections for unborn children in the third trimester of pregnancy, and legalize abortion until birth for any reason in any state throughout our nation.

So why did Democrats pass this piece of legislation that doesn’t meet the ratification requirements laid out in the Constitution and expired three decades ago? If the bill is so important, why was it rushed through the House of Representatives? What are the possible negative impacts of an amendment that was introduced almost 100 years ago? These are all important questions that the American people are asking. After months of listening to Nancy Pelosi’s insincere references to Benjamin Franklin, Americans should be asking themselves, “ If Democrats gained control of our republic, how long could we keep it?”

The Treacherous New Way Forward

CLICK HERE to listen to speech

The New Way Forward Act is a dangerous piece of legislation that would dramatically reform our immigration system. This bill would establish numerous new protections that illegal immigrants could claim for immediate release into the United States, including certain protections for criminal activity. In addition, the bill would drastically reduce the authority local and state law enforcement officers have to enforce immigration laws in our communities. As a member of the Committee on Homeland Security, I will continue to fight to secure our borders and protect our communities from criminal activity. I spoke on the House floor to express my concerns with this concerning bill and to urge my colleagues to vote against any bill that would impede our law enforcement agents in their mission to protect our communities. The amount of danger this bill poses to our national security should guarantee that no Member of Congress support the legislation. However, there are currently 44 Democratic Members of the House of Representatives who have cosponsored the bill and are pushing for it to pass.

A New Addition to the Team

Image

We are happy to have Tripp Hughey serving as an intern in our Washington, D.C. office. Tripp, a senior at Clemson University, is from Greenville, South Carolina. He is studying psychology and Ppilosophy and is a member of Triangle Fraternity. Following graduation, Tripp plans to attend law school. I am grateful for Tripp’s service to Mississippi’s Third District and wish him success in his future endeavors.

Sincerely,

Image

Michael Guest
Member of Congress


Site by Solve