... about reading the bill:
1. Would you also require the legislator to understand the bill? Or is mere reading, with no comprehension, enough? And if comprehension is required, how much comprehension is required, and how would you test that?
While I'd love them to understand it too, I see no means of enforcing such a requirement. However, I believe that if legislators were forced to just read the bill we'd get much shorter and less complicated bills. This would be a huge plus.
2. Imagine a particular bill is a long list of amendments to prior sections of the U.S. Code — perhaps hundreds of pages of amendments such as, "Insert 'and affects' after 'channels' in 5 U.S.C. 1040(a)(7)(C)." Would you also require the legislator to read the law that is being amended?
What I would want would be for them to read each section before and after the amendments.
3. Imagine that a legislator has promised to vote against legislation of that general type — for example, he has promised to vote against all tax increases, and the bill includes a tax increase. Does he still have to read every word of the bill even though he has promised to vote against it?
His job is about more than just voting. He should be participating in the debate over the bill. How can he do that if he doesn't know what it says? Yes, he should read the bill.
4. Imagine a bill is up for a vote, and the bill is overwhelmingly popular: No one opposes it. It is also hundreds of pages long. Should the legislator have to read every word anyway? Or is there some threshold of controversy or importance that needs to be crossed before the reading requirement is triggered?
These are, in my opinion, the most dangerous kinds of bills. These are the bills where someone is likely to slip in an amendment with little notice that does something they couldn't get enough votes for on their own. Yes, they should read the bill.
5. Does the reading requirement apply to procedural votes, like cloture, or is it only on the passage of the legislation itself?
Members of committees should read bills before there committee unless it is obvious the bill will never be put to a vote. Once it get's out of committee, they should read it before any votes on it.
6. Imagine Congress wants to dramatically limit the role of the federal government in American life, and there are bills up for a vote that do just that. The bills are very long, however, as they need to amend many laws, remove old parts, and introduce new parts that dramatically cut back on the size and scope of the federal bureaucracy. Do legislators need to read every word of those bills, too?
Just because I agree with the supposed focus of the bill doesn't mean the people drafting the bill can necessarily be trusted to get it right. Read the bill.
And yes, I am well aware that this will dramatically decrease the number of bills that can make their way through Congress. That's a feature, not a bug.
Recent Comments