Why not? - Page 2

Sandy G · #1 09-26-2009, 08:56 PM

As long as its Megyn, yeah, I'll stay w/her...You jackasses can go play w/Keith Olbermann...

merrylander · #2 09-27-2009, 06:51 AM

The problem with your idea is that not everyone has internet access, or if it is published in the daily papers (all 1000 pages

) there will be passages such as ". . . this provision replaces section 204e of HR3789 . . ." and then they would have to publish that as well. Which is why the jokers in Congress have staff, to read the bill and boil it down for them.

spasmo55 · #3 09-27-2009, 08:20 AM

Well, we have IowaVotes.org, where you CAN see the bills, and the last I new didn't Thomas.gov allow you to read current and passed legislation?

With IowaVotes you can even sign up for e-mails selected by bill or subject to alert you about any actions while the circus is in session.

I suggested to our local editor that they print these in the paper as they do the police blotter, but no action yet.

And yes it can get confusing reading through the cross references to other bills, but when it matters to me I take the time, and let the "Elected Ones" know what I think. Guess I'm bored, but huntin' seasons here now, not much time to read.

"Black Feet Down" Oh Yeaaaaaa!

Grumpy · #4 09-27-2009, 11:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Twodogs

Why can't we have the final health care bill posted on the net for a mere 72 hours before congress votes on it? The vote on this idea was straight down party lines, and even Snowe voted for it.

Is this the transparency we were promised by Obama on the campaign trail? Don't the Dems see that actions just like this are what fuels the right wing commentators that they despise so much? If it's not the democrats trying to "sneak" something through, what can it be? Does anyone know of a single "valid" reason as to why the American people can't see this bill?

Could a "normal" person understand all the legal, political, mumbo jumbo that such a document would be written with. I doubt it. What I don't trust is when someone has to interpret it to me. Unless its someone with the same views as myself.

Fast_Eddie · #5 09-27-2009, 11:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Grumpy

Could a "normal" person understand all the legal, political, mumbo jumbo that such a document would be written with. I doubt it. What I don't trust is when someone has to interpret it to me. Unless its someone with the same views as myself.

That's exactly right. That's why we elect people we trust. Yeah, laugh if you like, but that's how it works and that's why it is the way it is. It's not a direct democracy. It's a representative democracy. Personally I'm glad it's someone's job to figure that stuff out. And personally, I'm glad they have a shot at being there long enough to be held accountable for their actions. That's the problem with term limits. If they know they're not going to be there in a few years there is even *less* reason to do the right thing. Let the next poor bastard figure it out. Need proof? Look at California. Term limits turned a bat situation into a disaster there. I actually feel sorry for the Gubernator. He doesn't have a chance in hell of fixing anything. Hope it gets worked out in the next 15 years so I can still move back when I retire.

Twodogs · #6 09-27-2009, 11:14 AM

You guys are missing the whole point of the question "why not". Every democrat voted against publishing the bill online for 3 days before the vote. I'm trying to figure out why, unless there is something they don't want people to see. I'm asking for another reason??????

noonereal · #7 09-27-2009, 11:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Twodogs

You guys are missing the whole point of the question "why not". Every democrat voted against publishing the bill online for 3 days before the vote. I'm trying to figure out why, unless there is something they don't want people to see. I'm asking for another reason??????

The reason is that the complexity of the bill would cause so many questions that it would surly delay/defeat the bill. That is exactly why the republicans wanted it. The republicans did not care if was on line or not they just knew it to be a good strategy to defeat the bill.

Twodogs · #8 09-27-2009, 11:56 AM

OK, I'll give ya that as being the only reason. Now answer this; What was Obama talking about when he campaigned on transparency in government. Do you all remember the things he said? Stuff like all these bills will be debated AND written on CSpan. Do you remember that? Maybe it just sounded good at the time, sort of like closing Gitmo.

Sandy G · #9 09-27-2009, 12:19 PM

I trust our representatives (Yeah, right...) but I'd STILL like to see just what the hell they're voting on...An' this business of it being Too Complicated...Yeah, I'm pretty stupid, y'all know that, but I'd still like to be able to see for myself...An' WHY do they need to couch all this shyte in Legalese anyhowhoo ? If you CAN'T 'splain something to a 10-yr-old kid & make him unnerstand, reckon you REALLY oughta be votin' on it ?

noonereal · #10 09-27-2009, 02:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sandy G

I trust our representatives (Yeah, right...) but I'd STILL like to see just what the hell they're voting on...An' this business of it being Too Complicated...Yeah, I'm pretty stupid, y'all know that, but I'd still like to be able to see for myself...An' WHY do they need to couch all this shyte in Legalese anyhowhoo ? If you CAN'T 'splain something to a 10-yr-old kid & make him unnerstand, reckon you REALLY oughta be votin' on it ?

Which have you read previously?