Would you support this law?

[progressive hunter]

Every program in the Fed Govt has to be looked at freshly at least once every four years to determine if it is still needed

only after the law that requires all bills be read out loud to all congress critters on the house floor before a vote,,

 

[blackhawk]

How about one that says every member of Congress must actually read bills before they vote on them? All but impossible to enforce but voting on bills that are in some cases a thousand pages that no one has read is ridiculous.

 

[Nostra]

Every program in the Fed Govt has to be looked at freshly at least once every four years to determine if it is still needed

Do you support that law?

 

[Lesh]

Every program in the Fed Govt has to be looked at freshly at least once every four years to determine if it is still needed

That would sunset Social Security. No?

 

[ThisIsMe]

Every program in the Fed Govt has to be looked at freshly at least once every four years to determine if it is still needed

Hmm…depends on who’s doing the looking. I’d say, if you can find a group of non partisans who would review the programs, meaning no political or any other bias, and it’s not a program that is constitutionally mandated to the federal government, then sure, I see no issue with observing them to see if a program is needed or not.

How’d I do?

 

[LordBrownTrout]

That would sunset Social Security. No?

Can you comprehend anything? His proposal is that lawmakers would look at laws to determine if they were needed.

 

[BackAgain]

I’m gonna take a limited stab at it.

As always, since it will require some exceptions, the inevitable “questions” will be “where do we draw the lines?” And “who decides?”

Nevertheless, I say that, IN GENERAL, most laws about spending “programs” should come with a sunset provision. The significant set of exceptions to that general rule would be “social security,” “Medicare,” and federal retirement plans.

This does not mean that Social Security could never be re-examined. It would merely mean that it wouldn’t be required via any sunset provision. It may very well be that social security and Medicare need to be revamped. But the methods by which that may get accomplished would require some serious analysis and computations etc.

 

[easyt65]

Do not touch social security or Medicare. Back the fuck off!

Yeah, about that...TOO LATE.

I'm pretty sure govt officials have not only 'touched' your SS ... but have been seen stuffing some of your money in $1 increments into the G-strings of men during Cross-Dresser Story Hour at your kids' local school.

 

[JackOfNoTrades]

only after the law that requires all bills be read out loud to all congress critters on the house floor before a vote,,

Sit in the chair and have one of those humps read the whole bill out loud? Uh..no.
Here's a novel idea, do what you were voted in to office to do....READ THE F'ING BILL!! Just once.
Then you can have your staffers dissect it into tiny, bite sized pieces for you.
I'm not for subsidizing laziness. For either side.

 

[jotathought]

Every program in the Fed Govt has to be looked at freshly at least once every four years to determine if it is still needed

Who defines or determines what is needed? Who is making the decision?

 

[LordBrownTrout]

Who defines or determines what is needed? Who is making the decision?

The same ones that made these horrible laws. Its sort of an oxymoron, emphasis on moron.

 

[JustAGuy1]

Given the fact that most Congress critters and Senators don't read what's in the bills they are signing now, I would think this would be largely a waste of time and money. There are literally hundreds of programs within each cabinet member's purview. You'd be in constant evaluation mode and would get no legislation done....oh..wait....never mind.

"We have to pass it to see what's in it".
Dipshit

 

[struth]

Every program in the Fed Govt has to be looked at freshly at least once every four years to determine if it is still needed

Rick Scott proposed something similar but said every 5 years....the Dems greatly opposed it

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Do you support that law?

100%. Not sure why anyone would not.

 

[progressive hunter]

Sit in the chair and have one of those humps read the whole bill out loud? Uh..no.
Here's a novel idea, do what you were voted in to office to do....READ THE F'ING BILL!! Just once.
Then you can have your staffers dissect it into tiny, bite sized pieces for you.
I'm not for subsidizing laziness. For either side.

you and I both know we cant force them to do that,, but we might be able to force them to listen,,

 

[jotathought]

The same ones that made these horrible laws. Its sort of an oxymoron, emphasis on moron.

The legislative branch already has the power to amend or change existing legislation.

 

[struth]

Why just them? Why not every member of the USDA or the VA or the HHS?

The USDA is reviewed every few years...it's call the Farm Bill. Sunset provisions in legislation used to be very common practice.

 

[Concerned American]

Why are you afraid to answer?

You first, fence sitter.

 

[JackOfNoTrades]

"We have to pass it to see what's in it".
Dipshit

"Away from the fog of controversy"...dipshit.
You stupid fuckers always leave that part out.

 

[Billo_Really]

Yeah, about that...TOO LATE.

I'm pretty sure govt officials have not only 'touched' your SS ... but have been seen stuffing some of your money in $1 increments into the G-strings of men during Cross-Dresser Story Hour at your kids' local school.

My SS is giving me my own money back. I'm not taking any of yours.