DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post

**Twelearly** · 02-18-2006, 03:39 PM

http://www.downsizedc.org/read_the_laws.shtml

This seems like a truly inspired idea to me. Forcing legislators to read llegislation should result in much more easily understood bills and the 7 day internet examination period would make last minute tricks harder to pull off.

I agree, unfortunitely it would not work without other substancial changes to the way congress works. The bil would never get to the floor without ammendments and additions (pork) like connecting it to a school bill, or a downsizing of the milirary, or the subsidizing of a new bridge for Alaska. It would be necassary to make some of the following changes to get it passed. (Most specifically the provisions of the last paragraph)

*****************************

(adapted from an earlier thread.) Certain extensive RULE changes would be required in the every day operation of the House and Senate, which would include that of the State assemblies as well.

(1) The Senate would have an elected leader and assistant thereto and the House and legislations would each have an elected Speaker and assistant speaker. Each would be elected from the body of that entity. and as is presently the case, would be expected to be from the then majority party,

(2) Each entity would have it's sub-commities, as is presently the case. However,

(3) No leader or full committee may decline to allow a measure to come to the floor on it's own whim, as has been the situation in the past. The originator would have the right to announce the measure on the floor, and receive at least a vote by acclaim. then if there is still a legitimate dispute as to the right to have it discussed , The originator would have to right to call for a rollcall vote. Note, because of reasonable concern for his or her future interests, that person would not be likely to call fo such a vote, unless he or she thought they had been wronged.

Futher, such votes by acclaim must be valid. with no "all ayes/allnays/the ayes have it"? votes which took all of ten seconds,and as was an all too frequent scenario when Newt Gindrich and especially Tip O'neal were in charge.

Lastly and most importantly. Bills must be introduced separately or at least in appropriate combinations IE A school bill could not be combined with, or amended by a weapons bill, with each issue standing on it's own. In the past, not having such a requirement was the reason much of the pork spending had been passed, and many ammended bills were allowed to get thru to be certain the major issue was passed.

02-18-2006, 03:39 PM	#6
Twelearly Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 441 Senior Member	http://www.downsizedc.org/read_the_laws.shtml This seems like a truly inspired idea to me. Forcing legislators to read llegislation should result in much more easily understood bills and the 7 day internet examination period would make last minute tricks harder to pull off. I agree, unfortunitely it would not work without other substancial changes to the way congress works. The bil would never get to the floor without ammendments and additions (pork) like connecting it to a school bill, or a downsizing of the milirary, or the subsidizing of a new bridge for Alaska. It would be necassary to make some of the following changes to get it passed. (Most specifically the provisions of the last paragraph) ***************************** (adapted from an earlier thread.) Certain extensive RULE changes would be required in the every day operation of the House and Senate, which would include that of the State assemblies as well. (1) The Senate would have an elected leader and assistant thereto and the House and legislations would each have an elected Speaker and assistant speaker. Each would be elected from the body of that entity. and as is presently the case, would be expected to be from the then majority party, (2) Each entity would have it's sub-commities, as is presently the case. However, (3) No leader or full committee may decline to allow a measure to come to the floor on it's own whim, as has been the situation in the past. The originator would have the right to announce the measure on the floor, and receive at least a vote by acclaim. then if there is still a legitimate dispute as to the right to have it discussed , The originator would have to right to call for a rollcall vote. Note, because of reasonable concern for his or her future interests, that person would not be likely to call fo such a vote, unless he or she thought they had been wronged. Futher, such votes by acclaim must be valid. with no "all ayes/allnays/the ayes have it"? votes which took all of ten seconds,and as was an all too frequent scenario when Newt Gindrich and especially Tip O'neal were in charge. Lastly and most importantly. Bills must be introduced separately or at least in appropriate combinations IE A school bill could not be combined with, or amended by a weapons bill, with each issue standing on it's own. In the past, not having such a requirement was the reason much of the pork spending had been passed, and many ammended bills were allowed to get thru to be certain the major issue was passed.
	Quote