FROM THE BUFFALO GAP ROUND UP: www.BuffaloGapNews.com
Many members of Congress are having scandalous love affairs with deceitful, bloated and infectious legislation called mega-bills. Mega-bills are wrapped in hundreds of pages of legalese to make them look pretty, but underneath are pregnant with fees, fines and regulations. The Simple Bill Amendment would prevent excessively large bills from coming to term by amending the Constitution to limit the length of federal legislation.
The Simple Bill Amendment
"Congress shall make no law in excess of 10,000 words without two thirds approval of both Houses of Congress, and no bill of any length shall be voted for by any member of Congress without that member first reading the bill in full."
The Simple Bill Amendment would limit the wording of most bills to about twice the size of the U.S. Constitution. The Constitution's 4,543 words take about thirty minutes to read, therefore a larger bill under this amendment would take about an hour. In comparison, a legislator could read the Constitution 92 times before finishing the 418,779 words of Obamacare, not including the 20,000 pages of regulations it gave birth to.
Had this amendment already been in place, Obama's Affordable Care Act would never have been invited to the dance floor. At 906 pages, Obamacare would have simply been too obese to wiggle under the limbo stick at the congressional conga line. The same would be true of the Patriot Act's 132 pages, which due to its complicated language is being reinterpreted to allow spying on Americans who aren't even suspected of having committed a crime.
For bills that don't want to go on a 10,000 word diet, there is always the option of getting two thirds of the House and Senate to support it. Nevertheless, the amendment's requirement that legislators take the time to read a bill before voting for it would still stand ‒ a legislator shouldn't rely on the explanations of lobbyists or staffers as to why she should vote for it.
Members of Congress who vote against a bill are not required to read it in full. By skimming, legislators can often ascertain if too much pork or excessive regulation is in a bill. In such cases, a lawmaker could determine if attempting to amend such a bill would be an exercise in futility before running it through the shredder.
Requests to sponsor the Simple Bill Amendment are on the desks of two Republicans from Texas, Senator Ted Cruz and Congressman Randy Neugebauer. If the amendment survives the ratification process, the time and expense it takes to move bills through Congress should be reduced along with the swollen bags under the eyes of legislators who bother to read the 8000 plus bills introduced into Congress each year.
With bills being limited in size debate should be streamlined, allowing more play time for Democrats and Republicans to golf and eat dinner with lobbyists, which should be reason enough to garner bipartisan support.
The Simple Bill Amendment is designed to help you sort out what your representatives are up to. Shorter bills would help voters to quickly spot flaws and allow them time to sway lawmakers before a bill goes to the floor for a vote. It is time for left-wing and right-wing lawmakers alike to end their infatuation with lengthy and unnecessarily complicated mega-bills.
If you think former Speaker Nancy Pelosi was in a fog when she said legislators should pass a bill “so that you can find out what is in it,” then email or call your legislators today, encouraging them to contact Ted Cruz and Randy Neugebauer to support and co-sponsor the Simple Bill Amendment.
Lance Hunter Voorhees is a Yahoo! News contributor, actor and former radio talk show host living in Abilene, TX. You can reach him at Lance@LanceVoorhees.com.
Copyright © 2013 by Lance Hunter Voorhees, All rights reserved.
Comments
Well I agree that would be the way to go a simple bill amendment but take a look around they don't want them simple they would not be able to stick in the pork as effectively, nor could they sneak(note the term sneak) this is what Politicians have become in the USof A. Slimy sneaky (I think that is the definition of Lawyer). For me the bane of the US's existence are lawyers... expensive, trained to use words that the average person cannot fathom therefore they have made a notch in society that cannot be filled by anyone else. In total they produce nothing they are scabs that fester on the butt of a Nation.
They are ALL too busy politicking and fund raising for their "War Chests" to be bothered with reading new proposed legislation. They ALL would loyally vote for any legislation, especially a mega-sized bill (with secret compartments), without ever reading it ... IF IT HAD BEEN INTRODUCED BY THEIR OWN PARTY.
They ALL would sign into law a 'Farm Bill" requiring pig farmers to gently bathe each and every porker in a warm bubble bath daily ... if THEIR party had proposed it. Then they would FUND and SUBSIDIZE the new law with our tax dollars.
OUR entire governance system is now focused on enriching the elected ELITE and their appointed CHOSEN ONES, NOT for the benefit or betterment of the common folks who elected them. A "Simple Bill" will NEVER pass muster in Washington DC; as it would end their FUN and GAMES and stifle the POWER they wield over us now.
Terrific idea however! One can always hope for a miracle.
There's already a huge problem with Congress brewing up a huge pot of government power, then saying "Oh Foo, that's too big, too deep, too smelly for me to cook to completion SO THE SECRETARY OF XXXXXX WILL WRITE REGULATIONS."
If we force shorter bills, what we are going to get is LESS work by the people we elect (Congress) and MORE done by bureaucrats and lobbyists sitting around in smoke ... er, smoke FREE back rooms writing regulations. You think it's bad that bills aren't always read before the voting begins, REGULATIONS don't even start being written until the bill becomes law and citizen or Congressional input is so difficult then that it rarely has much effect.
Once a bill becomes law and regulations are written it is all but impossible to say "Shucks; we shouldn't make a law about this at all." That takes a new law and of course all the people who are planning to make money with THIS law are ag'in it.
Frankly I don't give a damn if my Congressman reads a bill or not. If it's a good law I may send him a note of thanks and if not, then I send him a flame and put a black mark next to his name. As far as I'm concerned he can slaughter a goat and read the entrails to decide what he votes for; HE IS RESPONSIBLE FOR HIS VOTE.
The really big problem is that most citizens don't understand that most new laws are destructive garbage and that we need to elect a different class of people to Congress -- people who believe in LIBERTY and understand that every law reduces someone's liberty. But -- you're probably tired of hearing this by now -- MOST AMERICANS HATE LIBERTY.
I wholeheartedly agree; but alas it won't happen because as Princes Palosi stated you have to read the bill before you know whats in it. I don't think anybody up there can comprehend any thing they read. US COMBAT VET: Vietnam: Door gunner, 1st Cav Div (AM).
Passing a bill that requires the BIMBOS er I mean lawmakers to read it shows how screwed up and in NEED of REPAIR the legislative process is in today !!!!!!!
Passing a bill that requires the lawmaker to actually read the bill before he can vote on it would be laughable if it was not so sorely NEEDED !!!!!!! HURRAH hope it gets implemented it is very much needed.
limit any bill to one side of a 8 x 11 page and no tag on to bills allowed. if you can't fit a law onto that, the law would be useless anyway. any bill must show where in our Constitution that law would be allowed.
NO FETUS WILL DEFEAT US
And Here Is The New Motto Of The Democratic Party,,,,,"NO Fetus Will Defeat Us "
-
1
-
2
-
3
-
4
of 4 Next