bodypilot90 0 #1 July 28, 2009 http://www.cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=51610&print=on Seems like it is his job to read the bill. Maybe he could get a republican to help him with the big words. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rookie120 0 #2 July 28, 2009 If he needs 2 lawyers to understand it how does he expect the normal Joe like myself to understand the damn thing?If you find yourself in a fair fight, your tactics suck! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bodypilot90 0 #3 July 28, 2009 They want you to trust them. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TrophyHusband 0 #4 July 28, 2009 Quote http://www.cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=51610&print=on Seems like it is his job to read the bill. Maybe he could get a republican to help him with the big words. lets step back from partisonship for a minute. don't you think there is a problem with the process when our lawmakers can't read and understand the laws they are voting on in a reasonable time and without help? i would love to see some changes in the way laws are made in this country. for starters i would love to see a law passed that required a lawmaker to personally read and understand EVERY WORD of a bill before they were allowed to vote on it. along with that there would then be minumum times between the final fraft of a bill and the vote (something along the lines of 24 hours for every 50 pages a bill is). this would stop things being rammed through without being read. this would slow things down drastically and stir much more debate, which is a good thing. it will also give more time for the public to digest what are elected officials are up to, and it gives us more opportunity to contact our representatives. "Your scrotum is quite nice" - Skymama www.kjandmegan.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lefty 0 #5 July 28, 2009 Quotelets step back from partisonship for a minute. don't you think there is a problem with the process when our lawmakers can't read and understand the laws they are voting on in a reasonable time and without help? i would love to see some changes in the way laws are made in this country. for starters i would love to see a law passed that required a lawmaker to personally read and understand EVERY WORD of a bill before they were allowed to vote on it. along with that there would then be minumum times between the final fraft of a bill and the vote (something along the lines of 24 hours for every 50 a bill is). this would stop things being rammed through without being read. this would slow things down drastically and stir much more debate, which is a good thing. it will also give more time for the public to digest what are elected officials are up to, and it gives us more opportunity to contact our representatives. Amen.Provoking a reaction isn't the same thing as saying something meaningful. -Calvin Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pmw515 0 #6 July 28, 2009 QuoteIf he needs 2 lawyers to understand it how does he expect the normal Joe like myself to understand the damn thing? I contacted his office and said as much. I urge you to do the same. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DrewEckhardt 0 #7 July 28, 2009 QuoteIf he needs 2 lawyers to understand it how does he expect the normal Joe like myself to understand the damn thing? You're not. You only have to pay for it and play along. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DrewEckhardt 0 #8 July 28, 2009 Quote lets step back from partisonship for a minute. don't you think there is a problem with the process when our lawmakers can't read and understand the laws they are voting on in a reasonable time and without help? Of course. That would be the Read The Bills Act http://www.downsizedc.org/page/rtba_legislation Quote i would love to see some changes in the way laws are made in this country. for starters i would love to see a law passed that required a lawmaker to personally read and understand EVERY WORD of a bill before they were allowed to vote on it. That won't happen since its not in the law makers best interest and we can't get enough legislators who disagree without abandoning our first-past-the-post electoral system and perhaps switching to proportional representation at a national level without geography based districts that render opposition spread throughout the states impotent. Legislation is about Congress creatures bringing home more dollars to their districts that the feds collected from the and/or their neighbors. It grows until there's enough in it for enough legislators to pass. It's about giving enough concessions to enough lobbyists that the politicians can afford to win their next election. Legislators need to pass big bloated bills (the HELP committee version of the bill I saw had only grown to 615 pages) to do that. Quote it gives us more opportunity to contact our representatives. That only matters if the local Republican or Democrat who opposes the representative believes differently and stands a chance of winning. With two nearly identical parties (think big government) being the inevitable result of first-past-the-post voting they probably think the same (although the marketing message may be different). With gerrymandered districts in most places the opposition isn't electable. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
StreetScooby 5 #9 July 29, 2009 +1We are all engines of karma Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TheBachelor 5 #10 July 29, 2009 Funny (sad, actually) that he'd probably vote for it even though he hasn't (and doesn't plan to) read it.There are battered women? I've been eating 'em plain all of these years... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
