0
27

[–] piratse 0 points 27 points (+27|-0) ago 

Maybe no one has had the time to read it.

0
9

[–] idle_voating 0 points 9 points (+9|-0) ago  (edited ago)

I have my doubts that the majority of the people in congress could understand the bills they get even if they did read it. I expect it to be worse and more verbose than reading the Silmarillion where I went from the things singing the song that got corrupted by Melkor to the massive wars started by Melkor(where Sauron was one of his generals) and was like "wtf happened in the last several dozen pages" because it was so verbose, dense and hard to read.

On the other hand, maybe if they actually had to read what they pass the bills would become less verbose and far easier to understand. Another thing that I'm in favor of would be controlling the scope of bills so that no one can sneak a rider for funding for their pet project into a bill that is supposed to be about something like national security or tax law.

0
9

[–] piratse 0 points 9 points (+9|-0) ago 

Adding "pork" to bills should be ILLEGAL as fuck. It's retarded and used by morons to push agendas. "LOOK AT ALL THESE (REPUBS OR DEMS) THAT DIDN'T VOTE FOR THIS BILL!!!!!" while ignoring the absurd riders that were attached. Like "let's spend $100,000,000 on vets healthcare.....but you have to give $100,000,000,000 to Saudi Arabia.

0
1

[–] carlip 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

i find the worst part of attempting to read legalese is the references to other paragraphs, usually in other laws. You try to read what looks like a simple 1 paragraph law and before you know it you have 15 tabs open because of such referencing. It has to be intentional.

0
0

[–] GuruFault 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

Perhaps a word limit per bill then also (also forbidding inclusion by reference). That would keep it simple and reduce opportunities to include multiple topics in the same bill. Then again, I've heard it argued that the cutting of pork is part of why Washington gridlock has increased.

0
0

[–] myvoicefromhell 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

The purpose of the bill is to counteract what you just stated.

0
0

[–] hunter3 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

i think thats the point

0
0

[–] wonkifier 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

"strike section X of code Y subsection Z's 'phrase W'; add 'phrase V' to section A of code B of subsection C"... multiplied by 100.

Sure I read it... do I have any clue what it actually means? no.

That bill won't fix much of anything. It will slow things way down though. In principle I wouldn't mind that, but I suspect that there wouldn't be time to actually accomplish anything other than basic 'keep the lights on', which seems like overbalancing in the other direction

0
7

[–] cmor88 0 points 7 points (+7|-0) ago  (edited ago)

Its the voting public's fault for putting people in congress who don't care about the nation.

0
2

[–] dabork 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

I mean it's a little more complicated than that. Yeah, we need to shoulder a lot of the blame for not being more active in things like local politics or really anything besides the presidential election, but there is just as much string pulling and outside influence on who gets elected to congress as there is who gets elected president. We don't have nearly as much true control as we would like to believe but it is true that we definitely need to take more of the blame than we are right now.

0
0

[–] myvoicefromhell 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

This bill helps that.

0
5

[–] wesofx 0 points 5 points (+5|-0) ago  (edited ago)

The bill should be read out-loud at some point.

EDIT: With all voters in attendance.

0
4

[–] IgnisDraco 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago 

Because the want their staffs o do their work and then brief them. It's not right, but they're lazy.

0
7

[–] bikergang_accountant 0 points 7 points (+7|-0) ago 

I think that would be fine. In the case of the affordable healthcare act not even staffers read it. No one did because it would have been impossible.

0
8

[–] IgnisDraco 0 points 8 points (+8|-0) ago 

That's true. Maybe a better solution would be to limit the size of any bill. They tack on everything under the sun into one they think will pass. A lot unrelated to the subject matter.

0
3

[–] LoudKoolaid 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

Limit bill sizes and require congress to read them.

0
3

[–] myvoicefromhell 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

This is what the Read The Bills Act is about.

0
2

[–] Basic_Nato 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

If this was passed then maybe there wouldn't be so complex and arbitrary legislation.

0
0

[–] myvoicefromhell 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

You are correct.

0
1

[–] z_impaler 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

It's relevant only if the bills don't have shit tacked on to them in the 11th hour.

0
1

[–] myvoicefromhell 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

This is what this bill is meant to avoid.

0
1

[–] Gigan 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

How would this be enforced?

0
2

[–] downvoter 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

Make them do short essays after reading.

[–] [deleted] 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

[Deleted]

0
1

[–] myvoicefromhell 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

Through the Department of Justice after it becomes law.

0
0

[–] plasmaflare 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

When ws the last time they Actually enforced the law?

0
0

[–] jhaluska 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

I would think a small quiz would work, but I don't have a lot of hope for it working as intended.

load more comments ▼ (2 remaining)