that's expressively -- explicitly stated in the law and it was our intention when we drafted that, mr. stern and myself, when we came up with that language to require those two thresholds. so i wanted to say that's something we haven't really gone into in any great detail, and i would be happy to discuss it further, but it's not possible for the commission or the board to adopt several of the amendments before you in my view as they are in violation of these requirements and therefore would be illegal. that came up at the hearing before rules and rules did in fact discuss that at length. so i think the rules committee would like to have a city attorney's opinion. if you don't ask for it, they will at some point. in fact, i would imagine that they will amend the law, the next passthrough to require this. that is the simple remedy, the simple remedy is to basically say that there should be the issuance of findings concurrent with the adoption of any amendment and i think that the city attorney would concur in that opinion. so you would probably be well advised to set up a mechanism where or a

mr. stern's from virginia. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i just wanted to point out that when we are discussing this i think we need to recognize, we are not telling israel to do anything. this is basically saying, they reserve the right to make the best decision for their best interest. when the previous debate was going on, it sounded like we were trying to twist this into a, we're going to tell israel to do something. i am coming out in support of this because i think we do need to allow israel or at least have frederick that is going to allow israel to be free to make their own decisions for their best interest. >> congressman, kentucky. >> thank you very much. i would ask to read this entire section with her amendment as she is proposing so that we can get up very clear -- >> is it correct on the screen. >> it is on the screen. >> is that sufficient? >> just a minute. >> all right. >> is that correct? >> no. we need to strike. we envisioned to democratic state sen. actually, i would -- it would read, starting on line 28 to my we suppor

mr. sterns. >> [inaudible] >> okay. this is page 4, line 17. after "ballots delirium" -- tha, is it after the word "ballots"? >> it would fall underneath where the additional amendment was added. it would fall in that same paragraph in the, in the adopted version. >> okay. it's immediately after the language of the last amendment that was just, just adopted. so we'll go, is that the end of that section? >> it appeared to be after line 17. and it could easily fall anywhere in that section as a separate topic only to assure that the vote by mail states. >> okay. let me -- just technically. page 4, line 17 it is now on your screen, this is after the new language that we just adopted about the electronic delivery of ballots where allowed by state law which will be, i believe, at the end of line 17. so this is new language being offered by ms. dye. and that language is highlighted on the screen. >> i would suggest that it would fit better after line 13. because it really does not reflect necessarily the military ballot, but all ballots cast by voter

mr. stern's from virginia. where are we? which document are we on?

mr. sterns. >> thank you very much.i'd like -- >> recognize yourself, please. >> oh, this is christopher sterns from virginia. oild like to make a recommendation to the gentleman from alaska that we take a look at this and see how we can incorporate this. because i think this is all great stuff that certainly belongs in the opening paragraphs of this, of this portion of the platform. um, i just think we -- it might be a better idea to craft it so it's more amicable to the document itself in terms of read and the so forth. i yield back. >> any other comment? >> madam -- >> mr.-- [inaudible] >> thank you, brad dee, utah. >> i think with all due respect, i think we're finally getting to a point where we're looking at the unintended consequences of some of the things we do on a platform committee. and after reading this, and i've read several that deal with these, with these -- we are as a platform committee recommending to the full body of the delegates that we approve a new government organization to monitor what we do in

chris sterns from virginia. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i just wanted to make a brief comment.he fact that we, we're addressing a couple of great items, cutting taxes and balancing the budget, et cetera. i just wanted to say this. monetary policy is the key motivation and one of the key motivations why i'm here today. it's one of the often forgotten facets of what drives our economy and what can sink our economy. the fact that we're covering it in this platform i am extremely gratified by. we're calling for further transparency in the federal reserve. i just wanted to commend the committee for actually putting together some great stuff regarding monetary policy. i just wanted to say thank you very much. >> you're welcome and hopefully next year we'll start auditing the feds. any other discussion on that section? >> this is mike wallace from maine. i have an inserted comment at the beginning of line 37. >> mike, can you raise your hand. ok, there we go. mike, go ahead. >> mike wallace, i have a comment i would like to insert at the second sentence in line 36. i have that written