this should be required of every single piece of legislation in both houses.

[tanj]

... deserve a praise ...

if their jobs are too demanding of them, I am confident that there are many who could take their places.

the idea that this would slow things down is something I already said would be a positive. the system was made to be slow and deliberate. not quick and easy.

 

[eohrnberger]

Multiple reasons: every legislator that is to vote on a bill has the obligation to know what's in it; and more importantly since there is no current rule that requires the legislators to be present and actually listen to it, it serves -0- purpose other than for delay. And beyond serving no purpose, I'm sure it is costly to keep the house or senate open all those hours with all the required personnel and security while doing no good.

If you want real good, make every elected official swear to their constituents that they will read and understand the contents of every piece of legislation they are to vote on.

If such mandatory reading becomes the norm, it sure would cut down the large omnibus bills which typically run into the multiple hundreds, if not thousands, of pages, leading to far more focused legislation.
That'd be a win for everyone wouldn't it?

 

[eohrnberger]

A least it was the actual bill that they read aloud and not something completely asinine like Dr. Seuss.

Sen. Ted Cruz Reads Dr. Seuss on the Senate Floor Video - ABC News (go.com)

In my minds eye I could see the reading of the 6 banned Dr. Seuss books. Made me chuckle for a sec.

 

[mrjurrs]

Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., made good on his promise Thursday when he forced Senate clerks to read all 628 pages from President Biden’s COVID-19 relief bill.
the government was not designed to act quickly. this process was intended to take time and be thoroughly deliberated. every representative and senator should be required to have read the entire bill before they can vote on it. on every bill.

I think we also need to find a way to prevent anything being insterted into any bill that isn't directly related to the purpose and function of that bill. making these bills hundreds and sometimes thousands of pages long only ensures that very few know or understand all that is in the bills.

It's a joke, he's doing it to delay the bill only. If the bill isn't passed soon, many federal benefits will lapse. Do you believe 1.6.21 was a happy excursion for families? Johnson does.

 

[Craig234]

if their jobs are too demanding of them, I am confident that there are many who could take their places.

the idea that this would slow things down is something I already said would be a positive. the system was made to be slow and deliberate. not quick and easy.

You might as well be demanding the Senate have to dance the hulu naked while chanting Swahili poetry. It's just that nonsensical how you demand they be unable to function at all and mask your demand with the false description that it's just 'not quick and easy'.

I'd be wasting my time to talk to you any more.

 

[Greenbeard]

I think we also need to find a way to prevent anything being insterted into any bill that isn't directly related to the purpose and function of that bill. making these bills hundreds and sometimes thousands of pages long only ensures that very few know or understand all that is in the bills.

Everything in the American Rescue Plan is related to the purpose of Rescuing America.

 

[j brown's body]

They need to get rid of the Senate altogether. They literally do nothing.

Most senators are famous for their stupid tweets.

 

[Bullseye]

- I never liked "riders" to Bills or unrelated items being placed in a Bill.

- Wonder how many Senator's stayed and listen to the reading of the Bill? Even if they were present, did they listen?

I agree. “Program” or “Plan” bills allow way too much wasteful or unrelated spending to sneak in. Short, single topic legislation should be required, Also, no extraneous provisions for the massive appropriations bills that are required every year.

 

[j brown's body]

When is the last time the senate debated a bill that was voted out of a committee after hearings?

 

[trouble13]

If you want them to read the bills, fire all their aides.

 

[Greenbeard]

If you want them to read the bills, fire all their aides.

What are the Tubervilles of the world supposed to do?

 

[Gaius46]

Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., made good on his promise Thursday when he forced Senate clerks to read all 628 pages from President Biden’s COVID-19 relief bill.
the government was not designed to act quickly. this process was intended to take time and be thoroughly deliberated. every representative and senator should be required to have read the entire bill before they can vote on it. on every bill.

I think we also need to find a way to prevent anything being insterted into any bill that isn't directly related to the purpose and function of that bill. making these bills hundreds and sometimes thousands of pages long only ensures that very few know or understand all that is in the bills.

Sure. Congressmen should UNDERSTAND every piece of legislation they vote on. Reading it into the record doesnt accomplish that. It simply wastes time and is abusive to the people who have to read it aloud. Johnson is a dickhead.

 

[trouble13]

What are the Tubervilles of the world supposed to do?

His job? I know thats a novel concept for the people in DC but we should try it.

BTW...
Aides are why term limits wouldnt do any good. The aides read tje bills then report back to thier represenitive of which groups support it and which are opposed. Then the represenitive weighs out pleasing which group benefits him the most, and thats how he votes.
That folks is how politics works. The voters opinions are only a concern to them in an election year and even then its marginal.

 

[SomeCents]

No on requiring that every Congressperson and Senator read every word contained in every bill.

emphasis mine

Really? In my opinion, reading should be the absolute minimum. Understanding it (much less dis/agreeing with it) is a different issue.

Fine print, be damned. These are some of our highest elected officials. If they can't take the time to even read the damn bill, proclamation, whatever for themselves, they've got no business voting on it. That's part of the problem with laws and regulations. Written by wonks or special interests, they never get truly vetted.

 

[Greenbeard]

His job? I know thats a novel concept for the people in DC but we should try it.

And how would we "try it" with a guy like Tuberville? If I ask him his thoughts on the appropriate funding levels for Medicaid home and community-based services, do you think he has a well-formulated opinion on the subject? Some grasp of the history and importance of that topic? Or any baseline clue what the hell I'd be talking about?

"Read the bill" is trite. It only means anything if we can elect people who can not only read a bill, but understand the concepts and the policies they're addressing. If the voters don't take the process of choosing a member of Congress seriously, they don't really have grounds to be mad when their member of Congress doesn't take the responsibilities seriously, either. Until we remedy that, be glad we have staffers around who can explain government and policy to the doofuses some voters send to represent them.

 

[trouble13]

And how would we "try it" with a guy like Tuberville? If I ask him his thoughts on the appropriate funding levels for Medicaid home and community-based services, do you think he has a well-formulated opinion on the subject? Some grasp of the history and importance of that topic? Or any baseline clue what the hell I'd be talking about?

"Read the bill" is trite. It only means anything if we can elect people who can not only read a bill, but understand the concepts and the policies they're addressing. If the voters don't take the process of choosing a member of Congress seriously, they don't really have grounds to be mad when their member of Congress doesn't take the responsibilities seriously, either. Until we remedy that, be glad we have staffers around who can explain government and policy to the doofuses some voters send to represent them.

maybe they would not get elected if they didn't have aides to hide behind

 

[Antiwar]

They should just do auctions and turn them into a well produced TV show. No British hosts! Yes to flamboyant auctioneers.

 

[RaleBulgarian]

emphasis mine

Really? In my opinion, reading should be the absolute minimum. Understanding it (much less dis/agreeing with it) is a different issue.

Fine print, be damned. These are some of our highest elected officials. If they can't take the time to even read the damn bill, proclamation, whatever for themselves, they've got no business voting on it. That's part of the problem with laws and regulations. Written by wonks or special interests, they never get truly vetted.

Do you have any idea how many bills are introduced in each 2 year Congressional period?

During the 116th Congress 14,063 bills were introduced. In the 115th Congress 10,075 bills were introduced. In the 114th Congress 9,674 bills were introduced.

Get the idea now?

 

[SomeCents]

And how would we "try it" with a guy like Tuberville? If I ask him his thoughts on the appropriate funding levels for Medicaid home and community-based services, do you think he has a well-formulated opinion on the subject? Some grasp of the history and importance of that topic? Or any baseline clue what the hell I'd be talking about?

How many of the 100 senators do you think would have the grasp of the Health Care knowledge that you do? Not many, probably very few. Maybe a medical professional like Sen. Paul?

"Read the bill" is trite.

I respectfully disagree. Anyone smart/savvy enough to get themselves elected to Congress should have the requisite skills to "read" the bill. And, maybe, they just might find that (1) it's too complicated and shouldn't be constructed as such or (2) there's actually something concerning in it.

I get it. People in "high" places often employ other people to "analyze" things for them. Happens in business all the time. But high-level business people only make decisions for their business, not for the entirety of our nation.

 

[SomeCents]

Do you have any idea how many bills are introduced in each 2 year Congressional period?session?

During the 116th Congress 14,063 bills were introduced. In the 115th Congress 10,075 bills were introduced. In the 114th Congress 9,674 bills were introduced.

Get the idea now?

And you don't see that, the number of bills introduced, as a problem?

No. I still believe legislators should read every. single. line. of every. single. bill they vote on.

Here in Virginia, with "part-time" legislators, they do limit how many "bills" can be submitted/introduced. It makes legislators carefully consider what's most important to them and their constituents.

 

[iguanaman]

it will be entered into the record, along with any highlighting of unrelated items in the bill. another part of the purpose.

The bill IS the "record" and reading with no one there served ZERO purpose. If you want to complain about "unrelated items" you should look at the last covid bill written entirely behind closed doors by the Republicans. It is over 5500 pages and would have taken days to read.

Several high-ticket items won inclusion, including an almost 400-page water resources bill that targets $10 billion for 46 Army Corps of Engineers flood control, environmental and coastal protection projects. There was also $7 billion to increase access to broadband, $4 billion to help other nations vaccinate their people, $14 billion for cash-starved transit systems, Amtrak and airports.
And then there were the smaller items stowed away in the thousands of pages — important to some lawmakers, but unlikely to win coveted floor time in a freestanding bill.
One section repealed a variety of little-known criminal penalties for minor violations, including the transportation of the water hyacinths and the use of the Swiss coat of arms. The section also decriminalizes the unauthorized application of theft prevention decals or devices, and the unauthorized use of the 4-H Club emblem, the “Smokey Bear” character or name, the “Woodsy Owl” character, name or slogan, or “The Golden Eagle Insignia.”
Though most of the items were listed in lengthy bill summaries, it was unlikely that most lawmakers would even know those things were there.
“Here are the 5,593 pages of language which I’m now perusing and on which we’ll be voting in about six hours,” tweeted Minnesota Rep. Dean Phillips, a Democrat who worked on the virus relief compromise.

https://www.9news.com/article/news/...tems/507-8eed8154-8404-496c-a201-e86f3436329b

 

[RaleBulgarian]

And you don't see that, the number of bills introduced, as a problem?

Of course it’s a problem, but not the issue at hand.

No. I still believe legislators should read every. single. line. of every. single. bill they vote on.

Okay. You are entitled to your opinion.

Here in Virginia, with "part-time" legislators, they do limit how many "bills" can be submitted/introduced. It makes legislators carefully consider what's most important to them and their constituents.

Temporary because of the pandemic.

 

[SomeCents]

Of course it’s a problem, but not the issue at hand.

Sorry. I thought the "issue" in the OP was that bills should have to be "read" and responded accordingly, regardless of if it's a 1- or 10- or 100- or 1000-page bill. I still feel the same way and am glad you believe I'm allowed my opinion.

You're the one who introduced just how many (excessive?) bits of legislation are introduced at the national level.

Temporary because of the pandemic.

While I used to consider myself somewhat astute to the happenings of local and state government, I haven't had the opportunity to really follow until this year, because of the pandemic, and our governing bodies doing things online/streaming (which I love and think we should continue!).

But according to this (official?) LIS VA Legislature doc, there might(?) have been limits before. I don't know; I'll reach out to my state-level reps who I've had conversations with and ask them. But I do know they were in place for this Session and not necessarily because of the pandemic. It's been an ongoing complaint from both sides. (I'd like to provide links but not sure I can. It's more of me listening to the people who represent me/mine.) Our state legislature runs on two different cycles (a budget one...and an 'off-year') with different time frames and state constitutional requirements. It's why I hesitate to make broad conclusions on how things c/should be done elsewhere and was careful to speak only to VA requirements.

 

[Lisa]

if their jobs are too demanding of them, I am confident that there are many who could take their places.

the idea that this would slow things down is something I already said would be a positive. the system was made to be slow and deliberate. not quick and easy.

The text of the legislation in question was posted online on the 24th of February if you wanted to read it.

Text - H.R.1319 - 117th Congress (2021-2022): American Rescue Plan Act of 2021

Text for H.R.1319 - 117th Congress (2021-2022): American Rescue Plan Act of 2021

www.congress.gov

BTW, How many times did the Republicans demand the same partisan stunt when trump was in office, or aren't we supported to notice Ron Johnson's hypocrisy?

 

[RaleBulgarian]

Sorry. I thought the "issue" in the OP was that bills should have to be "read" and responded accordingly, regardless of if it's a 1- or 10- or 100- or 1000-page bill.

The topic is whether or not legislators should be required to read every single word in every single bill (and attaching unrelated riders), not the number of bills that are introduced.

You're the one who introduced just how many (excessive?) bits of legislation are introduced at the national level.

Yes, to aid you in understanding how large of a task reading every single word contained in every single bill would be for legislators.

While I used to consider myself somewhat astute to the happenings of local and state government, I haven't had the opportunity to really follow until this year, because of the pandemic, and our governing bodies doing things online/streaming (which I love and think we should continue!).

But according to this (official?) LIS VA Legislature doc, there might(?) have been limits before. I don't know; I'll reach out to my state-level reps who I've had conversations with and ask them. But I do know they were in place for this Session and not necessarily because of the pandemic. It's been an ongoing complaint from both sides. (I'd like to provide links but not sure I can. It's more of me listening to the people who represent me/mine.) Our state legislature runs on two different cycles (a budget one...and an 'off-year') with different time frames and state constitutional requirements. It's why I hesitate to make broad conclusions on how things c/should be done elsewhere and was careful to speak only to VA requirements.

I’m also a VA resident (Va Beach), and you’re correct for the most part. The state budget is negotiated biannually and there are normally limits on how many bills members of both State House and Senate members are allowed to introduced however, this year is different specifically because of the pandemic.

“Because the novel coronavirus has made the logistics of legislating more difficult, Virginia’s House and Senate will strictly limit the number of bills that can be introduced for the General Assembly session that begins Jan. 13. Delegates will be allowed to propose seven bills apiece, down from the usual 15. Senators — who haven’t had a hard limit in years, if ever — will be capped at 12 each.”

“The House started imposing limits in 2009, capping them at 15 bills in odd-numbered years, when the session typically runs for 46 days. There were no limits in even years, when the session runs 60 days.”

Redirect Notice

www.google.com