MoltenRock
Topic Author
Posts: 1030
Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2009 11:35 pm

USA: Have You Actually Read The Bill?

Thu Jan 21, 2010 5:38 am

As the title asks, have you actually read the healthcare bill of either/both House & Senate? How about stimulus bill that was signed into law early last year? Have you read the energy bill passed out of the House last year? The financial reform bill that's out of the House?

Repeatedly, I see Americans argue using tired rhetoric on both sides about a bill, yet I have yet to see any of them dive into any specifics. Why can't people list what pieces / parts they are opposed to or are in favor of? Or is it as I suspect that people just don't read the bills, and get a 30 second recap of what's "in it" from their respective partisan news outlets be they FOX, MSNBC, Drudge, Daily Kos, New York Times, New York Post, or their buddy Bobby Rae?

Specifically, what do you like or dislike on the healthcare bill? Energy bill? Financial reform bill?
 
flybaurlax
Posts: 589
Joined: Sun Oct 05, 2008 12:34 am

RE: USA: Have You Actually Read The Bill?

Thu Jan 21, 2010 5:57 am

No I haven't, but I really want to. I don't argue for either side, just because I don't know what the bill is. I do know that we do need an overhaul, but the specifics I cannot tell you. If you know where I could find a copy of it, please let me know. Thanks

And now, I haven't read any of the other bills.
Boilerup! Go Purdue!
 
texan
Posts: 4060
Joined: Tue Dec 23, 2003 2:23 am

RE: USA: Have You Actually Read The Bill?

Thu Jan 21, 2010 6:28 am



Quoting MoltenRock (Thread starter):
How about stimulus bill that was signed into law early last year? Have you read the energy bill passed out of the House last year?

Yes and yes. Part of my job was helping municipalities and other entities figure out how to receive stimulus spending. And for other clients I helped interpret the energy bill.

Quoting MoltenRock (Thread starter):
As the title asks, have you actually read the healthcare bill of either/both House & Senate?

Skimmed the entire bill, read parts of it (the parts that stuck out to me while skimming), and read an in depth summary prepared by a law firm about potential affects of the bill. Still working my way through the entire bill.

Texan
"I have always imagined that Paradise will be a kind of library."
 
MoltenRock
Topic Author
Posts: 1030
Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2009 11:35 pm

RE: USA: Have You Actually Read The Bill?

Thu Jan 21, 2010 7:45 am



Quoting FlybaurLAX (Reply 1):
No I haven't, but I really want to. I don't argue for either side, just because I don't know what the bill is. I do know that we do need an overhaul, but the specifics I cannot tell you. If you know where I could find a copy of it, please let me know. Thanks

And now, I haven't read any of the other bills.

HR 3962 is 2,000+ pages but can be read and skimmed where need be pretty quickly:
http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h3200/text


The Senate version is almost 2,500 pages.
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d111:H.R.3590:


All of this stuff is on the internet, at a library, or available from your own Senator's office or House member's office, as well as other places. There are a lot of great resources online to get you what you need. Both opencongress.org and thomas.gov are invaluable for doing research. If Americans would take a little time to read a bill, rather than listening to predictable pundits touting/trashing a bill, they'd know for themselves if it was a bill they agreed or disagreed with and why. Who added which amendments, and those who voted against or for something.
 
gatorfan
Posts: 305
Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2009 9:43 pm

RE: USA: Have You Actually Read The Bill?

Thu Jan 21, 2010 12:44 pm

You could read all 2,000 page of the House bill and all 2,500 page of Senate Health care bill and not understand 50% of what it affects or what it does. This is because so much of the bill is written in language that references other already enacted legislation.

When the bill says, "The first sentence of Paragraph 3 of Section 4 of P.L. 100-45 is amended by replacing "and" with "or" and deleting all words following 'employers'" it's impossible to understand what the bill does without referencing that piece of legislation in an on-line ANNOTATED legislative database. Sometimes you'll then find that this referenced section itself references another piece of legislation. It could literally take years to work through the entire bill so that you understand every provision that was enacted.

Add to the fact that the House version of the bill wasn't fully typed up before it was voted upon. The version of the bill voted upon had handwritten edits and was published 15 minutes before the vote was taken.

The chairman of both the leading House and Senate committees have all said they haven't read the bill nor fully understand it. I don't care how you feel about healthcare. Passing legislation like this is dangerous because nobody knows what's in the bill.
 
ANITIX87
Posts: 2958
Joined: Mon Mar 07, 2005 4:52 am

RE: USA: Have You Actually Read The Bill?

Thu Jan 21, 2010 1:52 pm



Quoting Texan (Reply 2):
Yes and yes. Part of my job was helping municipalities and other entities figure out how to receive stimulus spending. And for other clients I helped interpret the energy bill.

Which is why in the other thread, you always know what you're talking about. And I commend you for that. Welcome to my Resp Users list, Texan.

TIS
www.stellaryear.com: Canon EOS 50D, Canon EOS 5DMkII, Sigma 50mm 1.4, Canon 24-70 2.8L II, Canon 100mm 2.8L, Canon 100-4
 
Continental
Posts: 5222
Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2000 3:46 am

RE: USA: Have You Actually Read The Bill?

Thu Jan 21, 2010 2:03 pm

Sorry, you can't expect everyone to read and understand what is the equivalent to 22 novels. Obviously few Americans have actually read the bill.
 
User avatar
Dreadnought
Posts: 9841
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2008 6:31 pm

RE: USA: Have You Actually Read The Bill?

Thu Jan 21, 2010 2:17 pm



Quoting MoltenRock (Thread starter):
As the title asks, have you actually read the healthcare bill of either/both House & Senate? How about stimulus bill that was signed into law early last year? Have you read the energy bill passed out of the House last year? The financial reform bill that's out of the House?

I read fully the original 1800 page House draft. I have skimmed the others that have become available. But you are skipping over the main point. These laws are so long intentionally to obscure what is in them.

There is no possible reason why a law needs to be 2000 pages. If you went to work for someone, and they give you a contract to sign that is 2000 pages long, would you sign it?

As I've said before, I want a Constitutional amendment that says that no law, resolution or act of Congress can be longer than 7,500 words (the length of the Constitution). If you can't define the law you want to pass in 7,500 words, by default, we don't want it.
Forget dogs and cats - Spay and neuter your liberals.
 
rfields5421
Posts: 5631
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 12:45 am

RE: USA: Have You Actually Read The Bill?

Thu Jan 21, 2010 3:25 pm



Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 7):
These laws are so long intentionally to obscure what is in them.

This is something both parties have found to their advantage over the years. Make the law actually passed very difficult to pin down to specifics.

Quoting MoltenRock (Thread starter):
I see Americans argue using tired rhetoric on both sides about a bill, yet I have yet to see any of them dive into any specifics.

With very few exceptions, laws passed in the United States do not setup many specifics. After the law is passed and signed by the President, it will be turned over the the executive department for enactment and enforcement.

The law could say that "insurance companies may not deny coverage for pre-existing conditions".

Those nine words get turned into about 20 pages of regulations by the HHS lawyers and administrators. Then it gets published in the Federal Register. Then enforcement begins and that may be close to what Congress understood would occur, or very far from the public understanding. There might be many exceptions, appeals processes, etc written into the regulations.

The big fear of the Republicans is that the bill is so non-specific that the administration could expand the enforcement and application greatly.

The big fear of the Democrats is that the bill could restrict the power of the administration to implement additional changes.

Both parties realize that even though the President/ administration have great power to expand or decrease the actual enforcement of a bill passed by Congress - that once something is implemented, making broad changes is very difficult.
 
MoltenRock
Topic Author
Posts: 1030
Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2009 11:35 pm

RE: USA: Have You Actually Read The Bill?

Thu Jan 21, 2010 4:18 pm



Quoting GatorFan (Reply 4):
You could read all 2,000 page of the House bill and all 2,500 page of Senate Health care bill and not understand 50% of what it affects or what it does. This is because so much of the bill is written in language that references other already enacted legislation.

I absolutely agree! And yet as we've seen the folly posted by the right wing declaring a bill needs to be read aloud, everything needs to be on CSpan, or the full text needs to be distributed to the pubic/mailed and received for 3 full days before any votes take place.

Nothing would ever get done in the US regardless which party was in power.

Quoting GatorFan (Reply 4):
The chairman of both the leading House and Senate committees have all said they haven't read the bill nor fully understand it. I don't care how you feel about healthcare. Passing legislation like this is dangerous because nobody knows what's in the bill.

Actually lots of people know what's in the bill. Maybe not the Senator or House member, but most assuredly those who actually wrote the bill (Congressional staffers). The vast majority of the legislation passed by either party has been sitting on the shelves for years and even decades, of previously passed but ultimately defeated bills or amendments.

The real people who do the heavy lifting are the people that stay in Washington. When Senator Ego, loses they go to work for Senator Vanity. They've wrote and researched the bill, and are on the front lines in making and cutting deals and then telling their twit bosses, "Mr. Libertard, if you call Ms. Bitchypants you might be able to cut a deal if you give up _________, to get ________". This is why I laugh when I see so many on forums say they like candidate __________, because he/she's a Washington outsider, and is going to change the way Washington does bidness. LOL! As if.

Quoting Continental (Reply 6):
Sorry, you can't expect everyone to read and understand what is the equivalent to 22 novels. Obviously few Americans have actually read the bill.

Laws are written by lawyers, for lawyers, and interpreted by lawyers and judges (whom are also lawyers).

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 7):
As I've said before, I want a Constitutional amendment that says that no law, resolution or act of Congress can be longer than 7,500 words (the length of the Constitution). If you can't define the law you want to pass in 7,500 words, by default, we don't want it.

Meh. That wouldn't change a thing. You just break a bill up into pieces / parts then. Sounds great as a campaign promise but won't work. In fact, the healthcare bill should have been broken up into smaller pieces, so each protection enacted would require the Republicans to vote "No" on each one. Breaking it up into 10 to 15 pieces would have been interesting to watch. One bill would be "preexisting conditions may not be denied coverage" another "insurance exchange market" another "employer responsibilities & reimbursements", and so on. My bet is that there is no way the Republican party could have just said no when done this way, nor could the US health insurance industry run against many of the proposals since many of the ideas in the House bill were and are Republican ideas from the 1990s.
 
User avatar
Dreadnought
Posts: 9841
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2008 6:31 pm

RE: USA: Have You Actually Read The Bill?

Thu Jan 21, 2010 6:34 pm



Quoting MoltenRock (Reply 9):
Meh. That wouldn't change a thing. You just break a bill up into pieces / parts then. Sounds great as a campaign promise but won't work. In fact, the healthcare bill should have been broken up into smaller pieces, so each protection enacted would require the Republicans to vote "No" on each one. Breaking it up into 10 to 15 pieces would have been interesting to watch. One bill would be "preexisting conditions may not be denied coverage" another "insurance exchange market" another "employer responsibilities & reimbursements", and so on. My bet is that there is no way the Republican party could have just said no when done this way, nor could the US health insurance industry run against many of the proposals since many of the ideas in the House bill were and are Republican ideas from the 1990s.

That's exactly what I want. It's kinda like a line-item veto, but spread accross the legislature as well. There are good parts to the current Health bill. But there is a whole lot of expensive trash in there too. Our problems are largely due to congresscritters packaging their porkbarrel projects and other special interest boondogles, which would never pass if they had to stand alone, into bills headlined with something that most people want. It's like telling us that if we want to buy a $2,000 new computer, that you must also buy a 80286 computer, completely useless, and you will be charged $1,000 for it. I just want to buy the useful one.

The massive ripoff is that congress creates these monster bills and tell us, it's all or nothing.
Forget dogs and cats - Spay and neuter your liberals.
 
sccutler
Posts: 5578
Joined: Thu Jan 27, 2000 12:16 pm

RE: USA: Have You Actually Read The Bill?

Thu Jan 21, 2010 6:52 pm



Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 10):

The massive ripoff is that congress creates these monster bills and tell us, it's all or nothing.

What's even better is, in essentially every instance, Congress itself is exempted from the effects of the legislation they enact.

They truly regard themselves as royalty, above the fray.
...three miles from BRONS, clear for the ILS one five approach...
 
gatorfan
Posts: 305
Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2009 9:43 pm

RE: USA: Have You Actually Read The Bill?

Thu Jan 21, 2010 7:19 pm



Quoting MoltenRock (Reply 9):
Actually lots of people know what's in the bill. Maybe not the Senator or House member, but most assuredly those who actually wrote the bill (Congressional staffers). The vast majority of the legislation passed by either party has been sitting

I used to be a Congressional staffer in D.C. I assure you that NOBODY knows everything that is on the bill. These things are done piecemeal so everyone hangs an ornament on the tree individually.

Furthermore, even if in arguendo I accept your position that people exist who knew everything about the bill before it was voted on, my point is that it is dangerous when the only people who have that knowledge are unelected, anonymous and not accountable to anyone.
 
MoltenRock
Topic Author
Posts: 1030
Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2009 11:35 pm

RE: USA: Have You Actually Read The Bill?

Thu Jan 21, 2010 7:25 pm

But your "pork" is another's badly needed local project. Are some of the earmarks abuse of the system? Absolutely. However, just because it is an earmark doesn't make it automatically wasteful spending.

Additionally, as a realist I keep reality in mind when dealing with anything. For 2010 which is a huge improvement over the 2004 budget which had $52.7 billion on a $2.3 trillion spending budget at 2.3% of the budget, once audited will probably be around $16 to $18 billion, on a spending budget of $3.6 trillion which is not quite half of one percent at 00.47%.

So do you scrap the entire process for "principle"?


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...ic/2006/01/27/GR2006012700168.html

http://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2010/...spending-bills/UPI-89521262798650/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_federal_budget
 
gatorfan
Posts: 305
Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2009 9:43 pm

RE: USA: Have You Actually Read The Bill?

Thu Jan 21, 2010 7:50 pm



Quoting MoltenRock (Reply 13):
Additionally, as a realist I keep reality in mind when dealing with anything. For 2010 which is a huge improvement over the 2004 budget which had $52.7 billion on a $2.3 trillion spending budget at 2.3% of the budget, once audited will probably be around $16 to $18 billion, on a spending budget of $3.6 trillion which is not quite half of one percent at 00.47%.

You know what they say about statistics. The proper analysis isn't earmarks to total spending but actually earmarks to discretionary spending. As the budget entitlements have balloned, the total percentage of the budget that is comprised of discretionary items has shrunk. Therefore, it's only natural that the percentage of earmarks (themselves a discretionary item) have also shrunk.

It's also pretty sad when we're viewing $16 billion in spending as inconsequential. To put it in perspective, the entire cost of rebuilding Haiti is estimated to cost on the order of $5B.
 
MoltenRock
Topic Author
Posts: 1030
Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2009 11:35 pm

RE: USA: Have You Actually Read The Bill?

Thu Jan 21, 2010 8:05 pm



Quoting GatorFan (Reply 14):
You know what they say about statistics. The proper analysis isn't earmarks to total spending but actually earmarks to discretionary spending. As the budget entitlements have balloned, the total percentage of the budget that is comprised of discretionary items has shrunk. Therefore, it's only natural that the percentage of earmarks (themselves a discretionary item) have also shrunk.

It's also pretty sad when we're viewing $16 billion in spending as inconsequential. To put it in perspective, the entire cost of rebuilding Haiti is estimated to cost on the order of $5B.

Even the total number of earmarks is down, from a high of 19,000+ in 2004 to 9,400, about 50% less. Hopefully this keeps shrinking. However, to be focused on earmarks as any credible deficit reduction plan is folly. In the big scheme of things 99.6% of spending is on other things. Around 25% of those earmarks already go to the bloated war machine of military spending in the US, which accounts for $750 billion +/- all in, each year but even the mere mention of reducing that ridiculous overspending is affront to conservatives everywhere.

Guess what? The USA doesn't have to do anything for now. Just let it ride. But when the dollar no longer is the currency of reserve America will have a currency run and credit crisis that will make this last one look like a walk in the park. In either case it will come down to US citizens determining their own fate, or the outside world subjecting them to it. The choice has been pretty clear since Reagan came into office, and only accelerated towards oblivion in the past 9 years.
 
User avatar
Dreadnought
Posts: 9841
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2008 6:31 pm

RE: USA: Have You Actually Read The Bill?

Thu Jan 21, 2010 8:09 pm



Quoting MoltenRock (Reply 13):
Additionally, as a realist I keep reality in mind when dealing with anything. For 2010 which is a huge improvement over the 2004 budget which had $52.7 billion on a $2.3 trillion spending budget at 2.3% of the budget, once audited will probably be around $16 to $18 billion, on a spending budget of $3.6 trillion which is not quite half of one percent at 00.47%.

When you take into account a 2010 spending budget of $3.6 billion, and the fact that government revenues are expected to be only $2.38 trillion, how can you defend even $1 of spending that doesn't absolutely need to be spent?

Quoting MoltenRock (Reply 13):
But your "pork" is another's badly needed local project.

As you said, "LOCAL" projects. WTF is the government doing funding a museum in Boofoo, California? Federal expenditures are supposed to be for the benefit of the entire country. If the population of Boofoo wants a museum, let them pass the collection cup among their friends and neighbors.

Granted, eliminating such waste won't eliminate the deficit. But it is ethically the easiest place in the budget to make drastic cuts and eliminations. If our congresscritters can't make such an easy choice, how do you expect them to make the really tough decisions regarding the cutting down to size of entitlement programs, defence procurement, and government bureaucracy?
Forget dogs and cats - Spay and neuter your liberals.
 
avent
Posts: 818
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 4:13 pm

RE: USA: Have You Actually Read The Bill?

Thu Jan 21, 2010 8:59 pm



Quoting GatorFan (Reply 4):
Passing legislation like this is dangerous because nobody knows what's in the bill.

I think it's safe to say the lobbiests know.
 
Yellowstone
Posts: 2821
Joined: Wed Aug 16, 2006 3:32 am

RE: USA: Have You Actually Read The Bill?

Thu Jan 21, 2010 9:45 pm



Quoting MoltenRock (Reply 9):
Breaking it up into 10 to 15 pieces would have been interesting to watch. One bill would be "preexisting conditions may not be denied coverage" another "insurance exchange market" another "employer responsibilities & reimbursements", and so on.

Trouble is, then you run the risk of not passing two parts of the bill that need to work in synergy. For instance, if you're going to require insurance companies not to discriminate based on preexisting conditions (which would add lots of high-risk clients to the pool), you've also got to institute an individual mandate (which would add lots of low-risk clients to the pool). Otherwise you drive the insurance companies bankrupt.
Hydrogen is an odorless, colorless gas which, given enough time, turns into people.
 
User avatar
Dreadnought
Posts: 9841
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2008 6:31 pm

RE: USA: Have You Actually Read The Bill?

Thu Jan 21, 2010 9:46 pm



Quoting Avent (Reply 17):
I think it's safe to say the lobbiests know.

Which is why the public does not want this bill. Obama promised public negotiations and no lobbyists. This bill represents the exact opposite
Forget dogs and cats - Spay and neuter your liberals.
 
dxing
Posts: 5859
Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2008 5:14 pm

RE: USA: Have You Actually Read The Bill?

Thu Jan 21, 2010 9:48 pm



Quoting MoltenRock (Thread starter):
As the title asks, have you actually read the healthcare bill of either/both House & Senate?

Yes and I have linked to them in different threads repeatedly when specifics of both bills were misrepresnented.

Quoting MoltenRock (Thread starter):
How about stimulus bill that was signed into law early last year?

No, it was passed and signed by the time the bill was online.

Quoting MoltenRock (Thread starter):
Have you read the energy bill passed out of the House last year?

No because it stands no chance in the Senate.

Quoting MoltenRock (Thread starter):
The financial reform bill that's out of the House?

No because again it stands no chance in the Senate as it is written.
Warm winds blowing, heating blue skies, a road that goes forever, I'm going to Texas!
 
MoltenRock
Topic Author
Posts: 1030
Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2009 11:35 pm

RE: USA: Have You Actually Read The Bill?

Thu Jan 21, 2010 10:01 pm



Quoting Avent (Reply 17):
I think it's safe to say the lobbiests know.

Of course they do, which means anyone can as well.

The Supreme Court ruling today will only amplify the money, influence, and sway corporations have over lawmakers.

America has the government it deserves.
 
AGM100
Posts: 5077
Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2003 2:16 am

RE: USA: Have You Actually Read The Bill?

Thu Jan 21, 2010 10:21 pm



Quoting MoltenRock (Thread starter):
As the title asks, have you actually read the healthcare bill of either/both House & Senate?

Why should we ? Our representatives were poised to vote on the bill 12 hours after any of them seen it. Go back to August and September 09 ... they were lining up to vote for a stack of paper that not one of them had read.

Now ... thank god for the huffington post... choke choke .... they posted HR3200 on the web. I read as much as I could stand ... it was mass confusion . But every-time you zeroed in on a certain issue , it was changed or said to be not included in the FC version . It was a bullshit.

This is a catastrophic fail for the democrats ...it was handled so poorly that its embarrassing . They thought that President Obama had such a power grip that no one would stand in his way... epic miscalculation. Same applies for cap and trade and stimulous ..they shoved the bill though so fast no one even understood any of it.
You dig the hole .. I fill the hole . 100% employment !
 
MoltenRock
Topic Author
Posts: 1030
Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2009 11:35 pm

RE: USA: Have You Actually Read The Bill?

Thu Jan 21, 2010 10:26 pm



Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 16):
Granted, eliminating such waste won't eliminate the deficit. But it is ethically the easiest place in the budget to make drastic cuts and eliminations. If our congresscritters can't make such an easy choice, how do you expect them to make the really tough decisions regarding the cutting down to size of entitlement programs, defence procurement, and government bureaucracy?

That's a bit like arguing that Congress should be running around rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic because at least that would be doing something, while admitting it won't do anything of import.

But look on the bright side, today's Supreme Court ruling should make the process of doing things a lot harder. Those poor, poor, corporations with no representation. *sniff, sniff*

I suppose the US government could raise quite a bit of money, by selling the naming rights of say, the Ovaltine Office™, Coca-Cola Congressional delegation, the FedEx State of the Union Address, Charles Schwab Federal Reserve Bank, or replace Lady Liberty's scroll-slate and have the new Apple iSlate Tablet as product placement.

Oh think of the possibilities!
 
dxing
Posts: 5859
Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2008 5:14 pm

RE: USA: Have You Actually Read The Bill?

Thu Jan 21, 2010 10:58 pm



Quoting MoltenRock (Reply 23):
I suppose the US government could raise quite a bit of money, by selling the naming rights

Don't laugh, a number of local governments do just that with their publicly owned stadiums.
Warm winds blowing, heating blue skies, a road that goes forever, I'm going to Texas!
 
MoltenRock
Topic Author
Posts: 1030
Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2009 11:35 pm

RE: USA: Have You Actually Read The Bill?

Thu Jan 21, 2010 11:39 pm

Product placement for the win! Maybe we can raise the $12 trillion needed to retire the debt.

[Edited 2010-01-21 15:43:12]
 
Continental
Posts: 5222
Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2000 3:46 am

RE: USA: Have You Actually Read The Bill?

Fri Jan 22, 2010 6:09 am



Quoting MoltenRock (Reply 9):
Laws are written by lawyers, for lawyers, and interpreted by lawyers and judges (whom are also lawyers).

That's great. But you cannot expect everyone in the US who has an opinion on this matter to have read the bill which is equivalent in length to 22 novels.
 
MoltenRock
Topic Author
Posts: 1030
Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2009 11:35 pm

RE: USA: Have You Actually Read The Bill?

Fri Jan 22, 2010 7:02 am



Quoting Continental (Reply 26):
That's great. But you cannot expect everyone in the US who has an opinion on this matter to have read the bill which is equivalent in length to 22 novels.

Most Americans haven't a clue about how laws get enacted. Ask someone walking down the street what "cloture" means, or how or why a politician might "vote for it before they'd vote against it".

Are aircraft engineering specs/blueprints dumbed down so the flying public can "vote on it" or "get it"?

So pray tell, why are laws supposed to be dumbed down to the lowest common denominator in the land of the lawsuit to placate the populace? I guess I'm one of those radicals who don't believe in "get out the vote" campaigns, but rather, "if you can't pass this basic civil government test your vote doesn't count" kinda people.

America deserves the government and politicians it has.
 
User avatar
Dreadnought
Posts: 9841
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2008 6:31 pm

RE: USA: Have You Actually Read The Bill?

Fri Jan 22, 2010 1:33 pm



Quoting Continental (Reply 26):
Quoting MoltenRock (Reply 9):
Laws are written by lawyers, for lawyers, and interpreted by lawyers and judges (whom are also lawyers).

That's great. But you cannot expect everyone in the US who has an opinion on this matter to have read the bill which is equivalent in length to 22 novels.

And remember that the Constitution, our founding legal document, was not written in legalese, but in English so that any schoolchild can understand it. Writing laws so that they are so obscure is unforgivable, IMHO.
Forget dogs and cats - Spay and neuter your liberals.
 
rfields5421
Posts: 5631
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 12:45 am

RE: USA: Have You Actually Read The Bill?

Fri Jan 22, 2010 5:56 pm



Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 28):
remember that the Constitution, our founding legal document, was not written in legalese, but in English so that any schoolchild can understand it

Beg to differ.

The US Constution was the second attempt to create a government - after the first one failed.

It is written in the legal language of the day, and was purposely written with the bare minimum of specificity to allow for changes in the country.
 
MoltenRock
Topic Author
Posts: 1030
Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2009 11:35 pm

RE: USA: Have You Actually Read The Bill?

Fri Jan 22, 2010 6:37 pm



Quoting RFields5421 (Reply 29):
Beg to differ.

The US Constution was the second attempt to create a government - after the first one failed.

It is written in the legal language of the day, and was purposely written with the bare minimum of specificity to allow for changes in the country.

Not only that but it's not "law" in of itself, but sets out what laws can be made in the first place. It's why it's referred to as a "framework", that all other laws are governed by, or as I think I remember from business school, "second order" lawmaking. It's taken 230+ years of Supreme Court rulings and legal precedent to tell spell out what is, and is not Constitutional.

If you wrote a law like the Constitution it would take just as much back and forth, suing, and countersuing to figure out what is legal under the program (healthcare reform) and what is not. America is already choking to death under the sea of attorneys it already has. You'd have to double or triple the number of lawyers in the country if you thought you could write laws like the Constitution.
 
AGM100
Posts: 5077
Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2003 2:16 am

RE: USA: Have You Actually Read The Bill?

Fri Jan 22, 2010 6:54 pm

We are asking too much from the same party who believes that home owners should be relieved of their mortgage agreements because they did not understand the document. They don't expect their constituents to read and understand documents , why should they.
You dig the hole .. I fill the hole . 100% employment !
 
Continental
Posts: 5222
Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2000 3:46 am

RE: USA: Have You Actually Read The Bill?

Sat Jan 23, 2010 3:47 am



Quoting MoltenRock (Reply 27):

Most Americans haven't a clue about how laws get enacted. Ask someone walking down the street what "cloture" means, or how or why a politician might "vote for it before they'd vote against it".

Are aircraft engineering specs/blueprints dumbed down so the flying public can "vote on it" or "get it"?

So pray tell, why are laws supposed to be dumbed down to the lowest common denominator in the land of the lawsuit to placate the populace? I guess I'm one of those radicals who don't believe in "get out the vote" campaigns, but rather, "if you can't pass this basic civil government test your vote doesn't count" kinda people.

America deserves the government and politicians it has.

But Americans can glean the important parts of the bill from various news sources and form their own opinion. They need not read what is the equivalent of 22 novels in order to support or dislike something.

Imagine if everyone who voted had to read all of the bills. Nobody would have time to go to work.
 
texan
Posts: 4060
Joined: Tue Dec 23, 2003 2:23 am

RE: USA: Have You Actually Read The Bill?

Sat Jan 23, 2010 4:07 am



Quoting MoltenRock (Reply 9):
Laws are written by lawyers, for lawyers, and interpreted by lawyers and judges (whom are also lawyers).

But they shouldn't be. Like legal briefs, motions, and papers, they should be written in a way that allows most people to understand the majority of what is being said (some words are legal terms of art that almost have to be included, so a few words may have to be looked up).

Quoting Avent (Reply 17):
I think it's safe to say the lobbiests know.

 checkmark 

Lobbyists have been writing the bills for over a decade now. If you really want to know why we are in the predicament we are in . . .

Texan
"I have always imagined that Paradise will be a kind of library."
 
User avatar
Dreadnought
Posts: 9841
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2008 6:31 pm

RE: USA: Have You Actually Read The Bill?

Sat Jan 23, 2010 4:20 am



Quoting Continental (Reply 32):
Imagine if everyone who voted had to read all of the bills. Nobody would have time to go to work.

Doesn't that bother you? There is a better way. Here is a link to Swiss Federal Laws, in English. Switzerland has been around a long time, and all the federal laws can fit in a single book.
Forget dogs and cats - Spay and neuter your liberals.
 
User avatar
CALTECH
Posts: 2789
Joined: Thu May 17, 2007 4:21 am

RE: USA: Have You Actually Read The Bill?

Sat Jan 23, 2010 6:26 pm



Quoting Avent (Reply 17):
I think it's safe to say the lobbiests know.

Oh do you mean like Obama's senior White House advisor ?

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q...JmZjhhNzBiYzMxMzkzZTQyMTlhMTIzNmM=
"Over the next four years, according to his personal financial report, Axelrod will receive regular payments, starting with $350,000 on December 31. Of course, those payouts to the old boss won’t make much of a dent in AKPD’s checkbook"

"Axelrod’s former firm, it turns out, was hired by umbrella organizations with deep Obama ties —"

"Axelrod, of course, says the White House has nothing to do with this sudden good fortune for his former firm."

"AKPD’s payments to Axelrod have nothing to do with the fresh pile of dough from the firm’s new ad contracts"

"LaBolt also told AP that Axelrod’s son, an AKPD employee, doesn’t “stand to benefit” from the millions currently being poured into promoting Obamacare."

Axelrod, healthcare darth vader, just like Cheney .

 rotfl 
UNITED Would Be Nice
 
texan
Posts: 4060
Joined: Tue Dec 23, 2003 2:23 am

RE: USA: Have You Actually Read The Bill?

Sun Jan 24, 2010 2:58 am



Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 7):
As I've said before, I want a Constitutional amendment that says that no law, resolution or act of Congress can be longer than 7,500 words (the length of the Constitution). If you can't define the law you want to pass in 7,500 words, by default, we don't want it.

I don't necessarily agree with that, but I do think laws need to be written in plain English. Some arguments, borrowed from the great legal writer Bryan Garner, on why lawyers need to use plain English:

Quote:
First, those who write in a difficult, prolix style risk being unclear not only to other readers but themselves. When you write obscurely, you're less likely to be thinking clearly . . . .
Second, obscure writing wastes readers' time-a great deal of it, when the sum is totaled . . . .
Third, simplifying is a higher intellectual attainment than complexifying . . . . [T]he hallmark of all the greatest legal stylists is precisely that they take difficult ideas and express them as simply as possible . . . .
Fourth, the very idea of professionalism demands that we not conspire against nonlawyers by adopting a style that feels impenetrable. Unless lawyers do the right thing and reform from within, outside forces may well cause a revolution that will marginalize the legal profession.

Bryan A. Garner, Garner on Language and Writing, 295 (2008).

We should require bills and laws to be written in language everybody can understand. What good is a law if nobody can understand it? Other than giving me more business, since I often interpret statutes for clients. Wait a minute . . . damn. I hate it when self interest loses to logic and the common good.

Texan
"I have always imagined that Paradise will be a kind of library."

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: PacificBeach88 and 7 guests