kevin erickson, minnesota. >> kevin erickson from minnesota. this was -- i was a part of the subcommittee. this was a very close vote to strike the language requiring the 2-state solution or supporting the to-dissolution. i think it is worth a fuller discussion about rather than completely throwing out the existing language and replacing it as a last amendment required, this would simply take that off the table. it would not change our policy, but one of the things that happens when we suggest that this is the solution we're pushing toward is that, that can cut off discussion if and when the negotiation happens of the other alternative solutions that make -- may come to negotiation. there's nothing in making this amendment that would pressure israel to do anything other than negotiate only when the palestinians reject. >> is there a second to the amendment? there is a sufficient second. discussion. >> mr. chairman. >> just a minute. go ahead. >> mr. stern's, the virginia. where are we? which document are we on? >> fp3. >> okay. >> mr. erickson.

kevin erickson minnesota. >> kevin erickson from minnesota. i was a part of the subcommittee.this was a very close vote in the subcommittee to strike the language requiring the two-stage solution or supporting the 2-cd solution. i think it is worth a full discussion rather than completely throwing out the existing language and replacing it as the last amendment required this would simply take off the table. what and change our policy. but one of the things that happens, we suggest this is the solution we are pushing towards that can cut off discussion if and when the negotiation happens of other alternative solutions that may come through the negotiation. there is nothing in making this amendment would pressure irsael to do anything again to negotiate only when the palestinians reject. estimate is there a second to the motion -- to the amendment, excuse me. there is a sufficient second. >> mr. chairman? >> go ahead, please. >> mr. stern's from virginia. where are we? which document are we on?

. >> kevin erickson from minnesota. this is a technical amendment, the word "to" should be in there. that's a technical correction. >> so, again, this is page 6, line 21. it will be addition of a new paragraph. does everyone have con 4? it's being written on the screen as we are reviewing it, mr. erickson. >> okay. to get it in the right posture, as a clarifying amendment on the first line "we oppose any effort to deprive citizens," we'll take that as just a clarifying amendment, mr. erickson. do you want to explain your amendment? >> thank you. i am currently a pastor, but before i became a pastor, i was a public defender. one of the questions i frequently got was how can you be a christian and defend guilty people. [laughter] i got it a lot. actually, in law school i said the one thing i would never be able to do was be a public defender because i couldn't do that. but as i learned how the system worked and how our constitutional rights as individuals are intentioned against the power of government, i increasingly und

. >> kevin erickson, minnesota. my daughter has been working against human trafficking since she was 13. i could not go home if i did not bring this up. by budding this -- putting this particular sentence in the section on human trafficking, it would undermine and create a hypothetical that could be very real, if there is a human trafficking victim in the united states who is rescued through law enforcement or something of that nature, they would not be a political refugee. and yet the person, even though they were not here legally, would be here through no fault of their own and should be able to be granted refugee status, and to have a shot at a new life. by being so specific, to say we would never grant refugee status other than political grounds is going to create unintended consequences which we may regret. >> did you have a comment on this one? >> i appreciate the gentleman in the issue forward. human trafficking is something i have put some effort and energy on, and what he is pointing out his the fact that s

. >> kevin erickson of minnesota. would argue that this is exactly why we have been unable to get any kind of comprehensive tax reform is because as soon as we start talking about it, everybody has a pet one. i agree, it's an important deduction in our current system, but comprehensive tax reform that we're talking about that we stand for means the entire thing gets redone from the ground up. and if it's a fair flat tax, then we don't need the deductions. >> any final comments before we act? i think everybody has heard both sides of this discussion. >> mr. chairman, jane timkin from canton, ohio. i would oppose this amendment. i believe and agree with senator talent that it does not produce the document that we need to produce if we get into specifics of tax policy. i suggest that we adopt an understanding of the general view of promoting home ownership, especially for the middle class, but notway into the weeds of tax policy in our platform committee. thank you. >> can we act before we act on her amendment? ok. ok. >

. >> kevin erickson of minnesota.xactly why we haven't been able to get any kind of comprehensive tax reform. as soon as we start talking about it, everyone has a pet one. i agree, it's an important deduction in our current system, but comprehensive tax reform that we're talking about that we stand for means the entire thing gets redone from the ground up. if it's a fair flat tax, then we don't need the deductions. >> any final comments before we act? everybody has heard both sides of this discussion. ok. >> mr. chairman, jane timkin from canton, ohio. i would oppose this amendment. i believe and agree with senator talent that it does not produce the document that we need to produce if we get into specifics of tax policy. i suggest that we adopt an understanding of the general view of promoting home ownership for the middle class, but not weigh into the tax policy in our platform committee, thank you. >> can we act before we act on her amendment? >> ok, it's been moved and i believe there was a second on april's amend