QuoteRep. Love has introduced The One Subject at a Time Act (H.R. 4335). Her bill would:
•Require that each bill enacted by Congress be limited to only one subject.
•End the practice of attaching controversial legislation to unrelated, must-pass bills.
•Require the subject of a bill to be clearly stated in its title.
•Make void in appropriations bills, general legislation that does not pertain to the underlying bill.
•Make the legislative process more transparent to the public.
http://libertyfight.com/2016/mia-love-one-subject-at-a-time.html
I just quoted an excerpt from the article. I can't speak to the validity of the web site or the article, but I think it's a really good idea.
In a rare occurrence, I agree with the socialist Will Rogers, "Be thankful we're not getting all the government we're paying for"
Quote from: Justaguy on January 20, 2016, 11:07:11 AM
I just quoted an excerpt from the article. I can't speak to the validity of the web site or the article, but I think it's a really good idea.
In a rare occurrence, I agree with the socialist Will Rogers, "Be thankful we're not getting all the government we're paying for"
I like the idea of this too, but in reality, I'm not sure how much will get passed.
Of course, who needs more laws? They should be getting rid of laws. No one has ever been able to count how many laws we have, just like the Feds don't know how many different departments they have.
She should offer a bill that removes from all government agencies the right to set regulations that have the force of law. Law making by unaccountable regulatory agencies is one of the reasons we are in an imperial Presidency. When a President fills the agencies with cronies, he/she can go right around the Congress and make laws on his/her own.
Quote from: mdgiles on January 20, 2016, 12:33:48 PM
She should offer a bill that removes from all government agencies the right to set regulations that have the force of law. Law making by unaccountable regulatory agencies is one of the reasons we are in an imperial Presidency. When a President fills the agencies with cronies, he/she can go right around the Congress and make laws on his/her own.
I agree with you that is an excellent idea seeing what the current president has done with EO's a regulatory rules. It would be a long time coming with all the lawsuits about executive authority.
Quote from: Dori on January 20, 2016, 11:15:30 AM
I like the idea of this too, but in reality, I'm not sure how much will get passed.
Of course, who needs more laws? They should be getting rid of laws. No one has ever been able to count how many laws we have, just like the Feds don't know how many different departments they have.
Actually Dori that has been studied, and they found out that you can't get up in the morning get dressed eat breakfast and go to work, in the Average American home, without breaking some law someplace.
http://www.cracked.com/article_19450_6-laws-youve-broken-without-even-realizing-it.html
Quote from: mdgiles on January 20, 2016, 12:33:48 PM
She should offer a bill that removes from all government agencies the right to set regulations that have the force of law. Law making by unaccountable regulatory agencies is one of the reasons we are in an imperial Presidency. When a President fills the agencies with cronies, he/she can go right around the Congress and make laws on his/her own.
:thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:
Quote from: mdgiles on January 20, 2016, 12:33:48 PM
She should offer a bill that removes from all government agencies the right to set regulations that have the force of law. Law making by unaccountable regulatory agencies is one of the reasons we are in an imperial Presidency. When a President fills the agencies with cronies, he/she can go right around the Congress and make laws on his/her own.
You have my sympathy on this issue, but you would end up with legislation that would look like the Encyclopedia Britannica. I mean, most Congresspeople do not read what they vote on as it is. Congress needs to do its job: If they are unhappy with an interpretation of the law or Obama's EOs, amend the law.
Quote from: daidalos on January 20, 2016, 12:48:20 PM
Actually Dori that has been studied, and they found out that you can't get up in the morning get dressed eat breakfast and go to work, in the Average American home, without breaking some law someplace.
http://www.cracked.com/article_19450_6-laws-youve-broken-without-even-realizing-it.html
I believe that. Then they tell us that "ignorance of the law is no excuse". The other problem I have is how they write laws. They are so full of legalese, that when you try to understand them, you can't.
Love's energy might be better served by keeping riders off appropriations-bills.
The Founding Fathers put it in to allow for the poison pill tactic, to achieve an atmosphere of compromise. They wanted Government gridlock. Our legislative-system is designed for gridlock.
DC was located in farm-country, near a barren coastline... to insure the greatest gridlock possible.
That said, I wouldn't mind if Love's bill gains mucho traction.
Quote from: Wyatt5 on January 21, 2016, 02:18:55 AM
You have my sympathy on this issue, but you would end up with legislation that would look like the Encyclopedia Britannica. I mean, most Congresspeople do not read what they vote on as it is. Congress needs to do its job: If they are unhappy with an interpretation of the law or Obama's EOs, amend the law.
Not really. A lot of laws would simply never get passed. It's easier for an unaccountable regulatory agency to slip something into law, as opposed to a Congresscritter who will have to answer for it at the next election. Besides regulatory agencies have whole floors of people doing nothing all day but think up stupid rules, which people can go to jail for. Congress doesn't have that big of a staff. Besides the Federal Code
ALREADY looks like the Encyclopedia Britannica - and much of it is just as outmoded.
Quote from: mdgiles on January 21, 2016, 08:42:00 AM
Not really. A lot of laws would simply never get passed. It's easier for an unaccountable regulatory agency to slip something into law, as opposed to a Congresscritter who will have to answer for it at the next election. Besides regulatory agencies have whole floors of people doing nothing all day but think up stupid rules, which people can go to jail for. Congress doesn't have that big of a staff. Besides the Federal Code ALREADY looks like the Encyclopedia Britannica - and much of it is just as outmoded.
Exactly. All the more reason to close some departments as a start to reducing our debt.
Quote from: supsalemgr on January 21, 2016, 01:42:20 PM
Exactly. All the more reason to close some departments as a start to reducing our debt.
Splendid...except there are so many even the U.S. Government cannot count them. Seriously!
http://mobile.wnd.com/2015/05/congressman-number-of-govt-agencies-unknown/
This is the way it should be. Voting based on beliefs. It will go nowhere.
Quote from: The Boo Man... on January 22, 2016, 07:49:31 PM
This is the way it should be. Voting based on beliefs. It will go nowhere.
So racism, communism and hatred are out?
The Dim party won't be happy about that.
Yes, Yes, and Yes!!