Posted on 08/11/2010 2:16:12 PM PDT by Andrea19
...[N]ew information has come to light that has made us increasingly more concerned that the legislation has not been properly reviewed - the bill does not even have a name. On the calendar, it is simply referred to as the "___Act of___."
Unfortunately, we've seen this feckless governing before. Remember the Cap-and-Trade debate last June where the House passed the bill before it was even cobbled together? And the health care debate, where taxpayers were repeatedly denied the opportunity to read versions of the bill as they were passed through committee in the dead of the night? It is therefore unsurprising that leadership made a big show of calling members back from August recess to vote on this bill to score political points, but when it comes to actually doing their job (i.e. naming bills, reading bills, understanding bills), Congress can't be bothered.
(Excerpt) Read more at fiscalaccountability.org ...
Help promote Conservative activism here & here & here & here
I thought I saw somewhere it was called:
The NEA and SEIU Campaign Contribution Money Laundering Act of 2010.
I’m sure.
Who cares? The whole deal of giving bills a clever name is a recent development, and it’s pure marketing. Bills used to simply be called by their number, or by the name of the senator or representative submitting them. Now it’s all clever acronyms and ways to disguise what a bill’s really about. Who remembers that USA PATRIOT Act was actually an acronym?
If they haven’t read it, that implies the obvious fact that they didn’t write it
Which begs the question.... Who is writing our laws, if not the members of congress???
“Can Taxpayers Trust Members to Read a Bill If They Can’t Be Bothered to Name It?”
It’s sort of a pointless question. The health “reform” bill had a name, but that doesn’t make me or anyone else trust that it was read before passed. Honestly, I would rather Congress simply read unnamed bills before deciding on them, as opposed to naming them but not reading them anyway.
On a related point, there’s no particular purpose in naming bills with misleading titles. Does anyone truly believe that The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act will either protect patients or result in more affordable care? Every scrap of news I’ve seen since its passage suggests the new law will lead to the opposite effects unless repealed or replaced.
I’d call it treason for a congressmen to pass a bill they haven’t read, esp. if it hasn’t actually been written. That’s what I call obvious.
Putting a title on it has become a huge burden, because they pass so many of them.
Apollo Alliance, Tides Foundation, etc.
I know those microstamping bills were all written by the law firm that also represents the company that owns the patent on the technology. I'm sure that's just a coincidence though (/sarc).
Campaign contribution kickback Act of 2010
Tax money to Unions mean Tax money to Democrat campaigns Act of 2010
Big Labor bailout / screw the Private-sector Act of 2010
I <3 collective bargaining, not peaceful voluntary free labor markets Act of 2010
“Card Check” bribes - er - Lobbying Act of 2010
Bailout unsustainable Greedy Union Pensions & Screw the Grandkids by Borrowing ad nauseum from China Act of 2’10
It’s “THAT BLANKETY BLANK BILL”.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.