Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Should there be a minimum time requirement between when a bill is submitted to congress and when it can be voted on? I was watching C-Span yesterday, and there was a 300 page amendment submitted to the house, for the Waxman Cap and Trade bill, 3:09 AM on the day it was to be voted on. That just seems ridiculous. I really don't like the idea of the majority of our reps voting on something that they've never even read.
So, how about a requirement that, for every 100 pages in length, a bill (or amendment) must sit for one day after being submitted to the floor of the house or senate before it can be voted on. One day would be the bare minimum, so that even if the bill was five pages, there would still be a 24 hour waiting period. Also, for emergency situatuations, you might put in a stipulation that a 3/4 majority could override the time requirements, allowing quick passage if it was absolutely necessary (such as a declaration of war or other state of emergency). You can't really force our reps to read the bills, but we can at least give them the time to do so.
I would also say that the bill has to be available for them to read as well before they vote on it
None of this "we put it on the web site" on the floor of the House where no one has access to it.
I voted yes and think that your suggestion is top-notch, WidowMaker. I have read that 20 years or so ago bills tended to be long if they got to 50 pages and look at that one yesterday. It was about 1000 pages long and then that night got another 300 pages.
I am sure that the length of bills today is caused too much by the fact that lobbyists are writing them and trying to cover every possible little thing.
I never thought too much about this kind of length of lying on Congresspersons' desks until candidate Obama promised that in his administration there would be at least 5 days from passage to him signing. Too many high cost bills have been passed so far without any amount of time at all on the same day and he signed them all the same day.
I think that you have an excellent idea. Now lets see something like that happen with this Congress and this President.
I just did vote no. I thought that was interesting too. I firmly believe that congress should be informed before they vote, but because of what might be a necessity, I voted no. Congress needs to govern themselves. If they asked me to vote on a 300 page document in that length of time, my vote would be an automatic "No" on the document.
I wonder if congress realizes how closely they are being observed. Anybody who voted yes to this document should be eliminated the next election.
Our congress lady wrote to one of the local papers that things were being railroaded through without any thought. Judging from what you just said, I think she is right. There's a solution for that, but until the voters wake up, it won't happen. We do not need a rule that the number of pages judges when something can be voted on though. We just need more responsible representatives. I am glad my representative is a very responsible person. We all want to keep her there although her hands are pretty much tied until we can get some more responsible representatives to aid her in responsible government. This congress is a train wreck.
I just did vote no. I thought that was interesting too. I firmly believe that congress should be informed before they vote, but because of what might be a necessity, I voted no. Congress needs to govern themselves. If they asked me to vote on a 300 page document in that length of time, my vote would be an automatic "No" on the document.
I wonder if congress realizes how closely they are being observed. Anybody who voted yes to this document should be eliminated the next election.
Our congress lady wrote to one of the local papers that things were being railroaded through without any thought. Judging from what you just said, I think she is right. There's a solution for that, but until the voters wake up, it won't happen. We do not need a rule that the number of pages judges when something can be voted on though. We just need more responsible representatives. I am glad my representative is a very responsible person. We all want to keep her there although her hands are pretty much tied until we can get some more responsible representatives to aid her in responsible government. This congress is a train wreck.
If the majority in Congress feel that way then they can stop it now. It doesn't have to wait til next elections.
Should there be a minimum time requirement between when a bill is submitted to congress and when it can be voted on? I was watching C-Span yesterday, and there was a 300 page amendment submitted to the house, for the Waxman Cap and Trade bill, 3:09 AM on the day it was to be voted on. That just seems ridiculous. I really don't like the idea of the majority of our reps voting on something that they've never even read.
So, how about a requirement that, for every 100 pages in length, a bill (or amendment) must sit for one day after being submitted to the floor of the house or senate before it can be voted on. One day would be the bare minimum, so that even if the bill was five pages, there would still be a 24 hour waiting period. Also, for emergency situatuations, you might put in a stipulation that a 3/4 majority could override the time requirements, allowing quick passage if it was absolutely necessary (such as a declaration of war or other state of emergency). You can't really force our reps to read the bills, but we can at least give them the time to do so.
Anyways...flame away.
I'd say no.
The bills go by committees. Their staff's are supposed to keep up on them. If they are not, then they need staff's that are not spending their time drinking with lobbyists and doing their jobs.
Maybe if rules against amendments (you know the pork) to submitted bills/bills out of committee, they (and us) would have better knowledge of whats in them.
If the majority in Congress feel that way then they can stop it now. It doesn't have to wait til next elections.
Maybe you haven't noticed that the representatives in congress are the problem here. So what are the chances they will change their minds. They need to lose their jobs.
Putting a time limit on how fast a bill is voted on seems irresponsible to me. That could be used in a wrong way. Representatives need to be free to do their jobs.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
