I've posted about this before but I think this is important to bring up again.

Bernie Sanders got a lot of shit by both Democrats and Republicans in 2003 for voting against the Amber Alert Bill.

However, in this article. you will see that Sanders voted against it due to highly controversial provisions tacked on to the bill.

Among the add-ons placed on the bill by House Republicans was one restricting the discretion of federal judges in crafting sentences for a range of crimes.

The provisions tacked on to the bill would have essentially made it harder to impose fair and just sentences for sex offenders.

The late Supreme Court Chief Justice William Rehnquist agreed. He wrote a letter to the Congress saying the sentencing provisions would do "serious harm to the basic structure of the sentencing guideline system" used by federal judges "and would seriously impair the ability of courts to impose just and reasonable sentences."

Sanders' camp said there is no inconsistency. Congress often passes mandatory minimum sentences for various crimes, but Sanders believed the sentencing provisions in the Amber Alert bill restricted sentencing in a much broader way, Weaver said.

Amber Alert was a very popular bill. One has to wonder why the Republican controlled house at the time would add on such controversial provisions. Who stands the gain from it? Who would you want to make it hard on the judiciary to prosecute sex offenders.

Questions we should try to have answered. We should start by pointing out the politicians who added those provisions to the bill.