Like Countable?

Install the App
TRY NOW

senate Bill S. Res. 100

Do Senators (and the Public) Need More Time to Review Bills Before a Vote?

Argument in favor

Congress should never vote on a bill before they (and the American people) have a chance to figure out what the legislation does. This bill holds lawmakers accountable and brings much needed transparency to the legislative process.

Curmudgeon's Opinion
···
07/04/2015
Bills that cannot be outlined in three pages or less should be rejected outright from consideration. Any longer and they cannot be enforceable because there would be too many clauses that conflict internally. Dodd-Frank and Obamacare are anything anybody wants them to be at any given moment for this reason. Also unrelated riders that poison otherwise "clean" bills ought not be permitted. Half of what ails the republic today slipped in as a rider.
Like (177)
Follow
Share
Diane's Opinion
···
08/17/2015
The fact this is even a question is embarrassing!
Like (61)
Follow
Share
Lenora's Opinion
···
08/03/2015
I certainly hope we don't need a bill on something that should be part of your job responsibilities
Like (44)
Follow
Share

Argument opposed

At best, this bill would be a speed bump in the day-to-day operations of the Senate, at worst it would have little to no effect. The Senate does much of its work by unanimous consent anyways, so the vote threshold isn’t much of a barrier.

Jim's Opinion
···
08/25/2015
This congress and the last one have accomplished almost nothing. Since giving them more time would probably result in more to thing, why give them even more time to accomplish more nothing?
Like (22)
Follow
Share
Todd's Opinion
···
08/25/2015
Information is readily accessible now thanks to technology and the ability to consume that information has increased as well. The leaders of our country must be up to date, otherwise they should step down.
Like (17)
Follow
Share
operaman's Opinion
···
05/09/2016
Yes, we need more time. How about 90 days. "Allow the tea to cool in the saucers" as history tells us.
Like (10)
Follow
Share

simple resolution Progress


  • The senate has not voted
      senate Committees
      Committee on Rules and Administration
    IntroducedMarch 12th, 2015
    Bills that cannot be outlined in three pages or less should be rejected outright from consideration. Any longer and they cannot be enforceable because there would be too many clauses that conflict internally. Dodd-Frank and Obamacare are anything anybody wants them to be at any given moment for this reason. Also unrelated riders that poison otherwise "clean" bills ought not be permitted. Half of what ails the republic today slipped in as a rider.
    Like (177)
    Follow
    Share
    This congress and the last one have accomplished almost nothing. Since giving them more time would probably result in more to thing, why give them even more time to accomplish more nothing?
    Like (22)
    Follow
    Share
    The fact this is even a question is embarrassing!
    Like (61)
    Follow
    Share
    I certainly hope we don't need a bill on something that should be part of your job responsibilities
    Like (44)
    Follow
    Share
    The fact that this even is an issue shows how far gone things have become.
    Like (21)
    Follow
    Share
    If you don't have time to read a bill then it shouldn't be a bill
    Like (19)
    Follow
    Share
    Information is readily accessible now thanks to technology and the ability to consume that information has increased as well. The leaders of our country must be up to date, otherwise they should step down.
    Like (17)
    Follow
    Share
    Hopefully, this will cause the bills to get much, much smaller. But just because our Senators will be given the "time" to read them, I doubt more than a few actually will. Most are butt kissing lemmings to their Party's leadership that vote how they are told to vote.
    Like (13)
    Follow
    Share
    Yes, we need more time. How about 90 days. "Allow the tea to cool in the saucers" as history tells us.
    Like (10)
    Follow
    Share
    Isn't that their job?
    Like (8)
    Follow
    Share
    Many politicians admit after they've voted on a bill that they never would have done so if they had read it in its entirety. Many bills have hidden pork and incentives for special interest groups that the public and congress need to know about.
    Like (8)
    Follow
    Share
    Uh, let's see... Considering the fiascos that have been enacted into law (the A.C.A. for example), because Congress DIDN'T take time to read the bills or allow sufficient debate on the bills, I would say that the answer is a resounding YES! It's a matter of (un)common sense!
    Like (8)
    Follow
    Share
    No. The problem is the poison pills added to bills. When you are morally corrupt, you need to push issues/other bills as poison pills attached to more popular bills. If you have one vote for one bill and no amendments unrelated to the bill, then you know who is on your side. A good sample is the elimination of plan parenthood federal funding being attached to the raise on the national debt. Last time a political stunt was done by "fiscally responsible" republicans on raising the debt ceiling, it cost us tax payers 1.3 billion in additional costs.
    Like (7)
    Follow
    Share
    Everyone should realize this is in discussion because often when one party is control of the house or senate, they can release a bill they drafted to the opposing party only an hour before so the other party can't properly review the bill. If a democracy is to function properly, each bill must be reviewed properly by both parties regardless of their holding majority of the floor or not.
    Like (6)
    Follow
    Share
    How can you vote on something you haven't read?
    Like (4)
    Follow
    Share
    It is profoundly irresponsible to not hold our legislation to higher standards of public review. When we do not take the time to adequately prepare and review our laws, riders - many unrelated to the bill's principal subject matter - are attached. These riders, typically pieces of legislation that would have no way of passing on their own, are added to the bill just before the bill goes out for a vote. In the case of the omnibus, members of Congress were forced to accept all riders at the risk of shutting down the government, as this 2000-page bill was introduced just 48 hours before the scheduled vote. Such a monumental piece of legislation, affecting 26+ industries and sectors of government, should be subject to public review that grants constituencies adequate time to address their Congresspersons; a dialogue should take place as to how the bill will affect each member and his or her district. The fact that this is not happening is worrisome; it is deeply undemocratic to essentially prevent the public from responding to this bill in due time.
    Like (4)
    Follow
    Share
    Congress should know exactly what is in a Bill and consequences that Bill will have on the people. The people have a right to know what is in a Bill and its consequences. Congress is elected by the people and are accountable to them.
    Like (4)
    Follow
    Share
    Congressmen must have read the bills they're voting on. 20 pages per day is a reasonable read rate. Maybe this will force lawmaker to simplify the bills and thus drastically shorten them.
    Like (4)
    Follow
    Share
    No, senators just need to do their damn job.
    Like (3)
    Follow
    Share
    If they can't Reveiw it and truly know what they're voting on, then they shouldn't be voting on it or they shouldn't be in office.
    Like (3)
    Follow
    Share
    MORE