No. The definitions of the terms therein are far too vague and, as a result, venture too far into regulating the rights afforded to private contracts between consenting parties.
If you do not support it, why not?S. Amndt. 2588 to H.R. 3326 – None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made available by this Act may be used for any existing or new Federal contract if the contractor or a subcontractor at any tier requires that an employee or independent contractor, as a condition of employment, sign a contract that mandates that the employee or independent contractor performing work under the contract or subcontract resolve through arbitration any claim under title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 or any tort related to or arising out of sexual assault or harassment, including assault and battery, intentional infliction of emotional distress, false imprisonment, or negligent hiring, supervision, or retention.
Translation: The amendment would prohibit the federal government from entering into contracts with any company that block their employees from pressing criminal charges for racial discrimination or on-the-job sexual assaults as a term of their employment.
Answer my reply, then.Yeah, don't do any actual research , just close your eyes - plug your ears and mutter LALALALALALALALALA. Democrat lalalalalala bill lalalalala.
Conservatards are incapable of a single rational unbiased thought.
S3S33R, you should have said that this bill was written by Ted Nugent , Glen Beck, Chuck Norris , Toby Keith, or Rush Limbaugh. The conservasheep would be all for it then.