20 Minutes, 422 Pages
Posted on September 26th, 2007 by bile Categories and Tags: Uncategorized, debate, drugs, FDA, food, Food and Drug Administration, House of Representives, nanny state, politics, Senate, votingThe latest (Sept 24) RSC Update is interesting. It provided us with today’s Quote of the Day that led off this message. It also includes this statement about H.R. 3580, the Food and Drug Administration Amendments Act of 2007 introduced on Wednesday, September 19: “Final bill text released twenty minutes before floor consideration.” That’s bad. What makes it worse is, this bill is 422 pages long. Is it just me, or does 20 minutes seem like not quite enough time to read 422 pages?
Even worse than that, the bill was passed on a “suspend the rules and pass” motion - that is, they voted on the measure without debate. Such motions can only pass with two-thirds of the vote, but that was no problem, as this one passed with 405 in favor and only 7 opposed. The Senate passed the bill the next day by unanimous consent.
Admittedly, the bill wasn’t entirely new. Earlier in the year, the Senate passed an apparently similar bill, the 500-page S. 1082, and the House had passed the similar, 312-page H.R. 2900. The subject, then, wasn’t completely out-of-the-blue. But those two bills were different from each other by 188 pages. H.R. 3580 appears to split the difference, but what has been added from the previous bills? What has been subtracted? Has anything been secretly inserted? Aside from the legislative staffers who put it together, does anyone know? Were they “helped” by Administration bureaucrats? By lobbyists?
I think this speaks for itself. I’d imagine it’s not as bad as the other bill similarly passed… the PATRIOT Act… but it’s still absolutely disgusting that this happens.
This dispatch if you notice mentions blog of bile as a new RTBA coalition member.
6 Responses to “20 Minutes, 422 Pages”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
September 26th, 2007 at 6:40 pm
What the sh**!?! Do they get paid by the page like Charley Dickens?
September 27th, 2007 at 2:08 pm
You’d think. Do you see the reasons for my disgust of the system yet? It’s not just what they do… but the means too that are just unjustifiable.
September 27th, 2007 at 3:47 pm
I’d personally rather see a ‘narrowly define your bill’ movement that restricts the domain of bills. One bill/law, one strictly defined idea. Stop adding bridges to nowhere or toothless congressional statements to the end of an education bill.
September 27th, 2007 at 4:02 pm
like:
the Read the Bills Act and the Write the Laws Act and the CSA’s Constitution Article 1, Section 9.20: Every law, or resolution having the force of law, shall relate to but one subject, and that shall be expressed in the title.
I thought someone is pushing an amendment to do the same but I can’t seem to find it right now. Oh and the bridge to nowhere was recently dropped.
September 27th, 2007 at 5:44 pm
I understand your disgust for the system probably as well as you understand my disgust for human beings. One place where we disagree is in how to change the system.
October 1st, 2007 at 1:05 pm
maybe they really are reading the bills. just really, really quickly:
The trade-off between “speed” and comprehension must be analyzed with respect to the type of reading that is being done, the risks associated with mis-understanding due to low comprehension, and the benefits associated with getting through the material quickly and gaining information at the actual rate it is obtained.
unlikely.