should congress have a waiting period before voting? (government, support, voted)

[yeahboy79]

when a bill finishes debate and is ready to be voted on, doesn't it make sense to have a built in waiting period?

We have had a bunch of complex bills spanning hundreds of pages. There are all kinds of hidden pork in it that isn't found until after. I think it's impossible for anyone to fully understand what is in it. we wait until the last possible minute to fund the government or agree on disaster relief. the bills then get voted on by people who have no idea what is really in it.

By adding a waiting period, say 48 hours, it gives everyone a chance to read it, research it and probably most importantly, for it to be available for the general public to read and understand. the public can then reach out to their representative to voice support or opposition.

[thecoalman]

Originally Posted by yeahboy79

We have had a bunch of complex bills spanning hundreds of pages. There are all kinds of hidden pork in it that isn't found until after.

The primary reason these bills grow so large is to prevent lawsuits. If they do not specifically spell out what the intention is it will end up in the courts for their interpretation of the intent. For example the 1990 amendment to Clean Air Act gives the EPA the authority to regulate greenhouse gases. It was never intended for that purpose, that went to SCOTUS which ruled in favor of the EPA. To rectify that requires new legislation that specifically excludes greenhouse gases which would make the SCOTUS ruling moot.

[jghorton]

If they actually read and thought about the bill, a delay might be worthwhile. But, these days, the only thing that seems to matter in this polarized congress is whether they have a D or R beside their name. They all seem to vote in lock-step based on that (or on whether Trump is in favor of it or not).