Posted on 09/30/2007 12:33:58 PM PDT by yorkie
HR 3675 IH
110th CONGRESS
1st Session
H. R. 3675 To prohibit Federal grants to or contracts with Columbia University.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
September 26, 2007
Mr. HUNTER introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Education and Labor
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A BILL To prohibit Federal grants to or contracts with Columbia University.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the `Restore Patriotism to University Campuses Act'.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
Congress finds the following:
(1) Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has called for the destruction of the State of Israel, a critical ally of the United States.
(2) In January 2007, commander of Multinational Corps-Iraq, Lt. Gen. Ray Odierno stated that the United States had traced back to Iran serial numbers of weapons captured in Iraq, including rocket-propelled grenades, roadside bombs and Katyusha rockets.
(3) These types of weapons have been used in Iraq to kill and injure members of American, Iraqi, and coalition forces and undermine the nascent Iraqi government.
(4) Despite Iran's support for terrorism, Columbia University extended an invitation to Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to address students and faculty from the University campus.
(Excerpt) Read more at govtrack.us ...
Even though I think what Columbia did was wrong, I have a problem with that. If Columbia bans ROTC, then the Govt should take funds away.
Mind you, I believe that federal funding of education should very very limited to begin with.
From the bill:
(5) Columbia University dissolved its long-standing Reserve Officer Training Corps (ROTC) program on campus because of disagreement with United States military policy, and for nearly four decades has not invited the return of any ROTC program to the University campus.
(6) Despite this fact, Columbia University has continued to accept funds made available through ROTC scholarships, while University faculty continue to oppose United States military policies and law.
(7) Through their invitation, Columbia University provided a public, prestigious platform on United States soil from which on September 24, 2007, President Ahmadinejad spoke and defended his wide-ranging support for terrorist activities.
Doesn’t this fall under the prohibition of bills of attainder?
Laws must be general in scope: they must apply to all citizens. Making a law that applies to only one person or legal entity is BAD LAWMAKING and causes a loss of respect for the law.
I like it. Makes more sense than the idiotic, “Anti-Limbaugh,” thing that they’re going to try.
Regardless, I think the sweeping goal of "Restore Patriotism to University Campuses [Act]" is a rather unlikely outcome of this penalty on Columbia; pleasant though it would be to not have our campuses filled with hate towards America. It'll take more than this act to reverse 50 years of that.
As in "zero funding".
Right and I am sort of stuck in my conservatarian loop on this. If they university cannot cooperate with the Govt (in the Govt’s constitution duty to protect the country) the Govt should have the right to chose.
It is pretty close to a Bill of Attainder.
I don't like federal funding for education, and I like it even less when threatened withdrawal of same is used as coercion.
I don't think Columbia's action in inviting Ahmanutjob should be seen as undercutting the Govt's duty to protect the country. He was there in NYC anyway for the UN (that's a different discussion), and using Columbia as a soapbox, while offensive, is not truly threatening to America's security, per se.
I think it was wrong and stupid to give him a place to tear down America on our own soil.
And yeah, on reflection, this probably is more or less a bill of attander, being after-the-fact retribution without hearing or trial. I doubt it'll have any real effect -- this is one of those bills that Congresscritters love to tout in their pro-America credentials list, but not much else.
To me there is no basic substantial difference. They are areas the government simply "doesn't belong".
Like the security guard at the NSA gate told me, "You Don't Belong Here".
As worded, yes.
However, it is just as easy to modify the law so that ANY college that .....
Doesn’t federal law already state that if an educational institution bans the ROTC then fed funding can be cut off? Is that correct or not?
Anyone out there know the answer to this?
Thanks!
Do we really elect these people to come up with reactionary crap like this?
I have an answer. Sedition is not free speech. Aiding and abetting the enemy, through words or deeds, is sedition.
Hopefully this law, if it passes, would apply to all universities, not just Columbia.
It’s time that our institutions of higher learning moderate their points of view, especially by the guests they invite and to whom they give a prestigious forum.
Captain Marmalade, the Persian, has made it abundantly clear that he wants to remove Israel from the earth. In my view, that’s about as close to a declaration of war, or at the very least, murderous intent, as he could get.
And Columbia invited him to speak because why?
Well, let's hope they aren't; but it wouldn't surprise me. This is not our only or first clue that we're really in a bad place socially.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.