I'd Vote for This

[Clementine]

I agree. All of them should understand what they are voting on. That is their job and they aren't even phoning it in half the time. They campaign a lot and focus on bills they want, but blindly support other bills for their party.

 

[GHook93]

What do you think?

Here is a much much better idea. Scrap the 1000 page bills, heck scrap the 100s page bills. One could even read and comprehend a bill that long in a year and they usually have only a few days. The constitution was less than 20 pages and you could read it in one sitting.

Make the standard at <20 pages like the laws used to be. Have an exception of up to 50 pages. After that it has to be 2 or more separate bills. Require at least 1 week of ZERO changes to the bill before it can be voted on. If there are any changes then there is additional time. 1 day for very minor changes (such as adding a paragraph), 3 days for larger minor charges (1-2 pages) and another week for any other changes. Shorten the time for a filibuster. A filibuster can length the time to 1 month. After that it must be voted on.

The reason our laws are so fucked up is because the framers purposely make them SO long that the Congressman do not read it before it gets voted on. They can back it with pork and other freebies. Case in point. Obamacare, a healthcare law, had provisions on student lending that drastically changed the student loan industry. The most radical changes to student lending ever. It wasn't discussed at all, since the discussion was all on the radical changes to healthcare. That provision should have been a separate bill. It also had Indian gaming rights and other provisions that have nothing to do with healthcare.

It's not just Demorat bills, Republicans are guilty of it. Sarbanes-Oxley was also way too long, created too much ambiguity and had provisions that should have been separate bills!

 

[Lonestar_logic]

What a ******* dumb idea.

So whenever you support a bill you simply say why you support it, and give some BS reasons why you think it could have "possible" negatives? If you hate a Bill you just write all the bullshit as to why you hate the bill...

What, is this a test? Like someone did read the bill and they have an all knowing power to tell congressmen if their answers were right or wrong? So if you don't like Obamacare are you given an F by this magical know all 'Answer being." If you love Obamacare are you given a AA++ with a side of boobs because this all knowing being liked your answer on Obamacare (random bill)?

How about we follow the constitution and stop pretending the general welfare clause means congress can force people to buy things or steal from others to pay for people that simply want money they didn't earn... or go to war and call it a not war because there are no "boots on the ground" and killing is done by drones and money.

Well said. I thought the same thing when I read the OP.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

What do you think?

As it is now, lobbyists write legislation. Its a very corrupt system.