View Poll Results: Should politicians be required by law to read the bill themselves before signing them

Voters
99. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    87 87.88%
  • No

    12 12.12%
Page 8 of 16 FirstFirst ... 678910 ... LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 153

Thread: Should politicians be required by law to read the bill themselves before signing them

  1. #71
    User BoyKagome's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Michigan
    Last Seen
    08-18-09 @ 10:39 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    32

    Re: Should politicians be required by law to read the bill themselves before signing

    That's not even really the point, speed reading is one thing and then having a staffer summarize the bill... But we have politicians that vote on bills to which even Think Tanks that have devoted the whole 42 hours they get to look at the thing, and even they only know bits and pieces; so you know the politician know nothing about it. The bill could at some point say " All people who owns a pet kitten is charged 400 dollars." and they would of just voted for it. On top of that were we not promised a transparent government? That's my 2 cents at any rate...

  2. #72
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Seen
    02-12-11 @ 12:32 PM
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    939

    Re: Should politicians be required by law to read the bill themselves before signing

    Quote Originally Posted by jamesrage View Post
    Never know until you try.Those in office a couple of summers ago thought they were going to pass the McCain/Kennedy/Bush amnesty for illegals but the flood of angry calls and faxes put stop to that.




    The time thing is a totally irrelevant thing because it is their job to know exactly what they are signing for not blindly sign things into law. If they have to miss a few extra bills or worker long then they need to decide which bills are the most important and work on those first.


    Would you blindly sign a contract that can have an effect on you for 20 or years of your life?
    1. The amnesty for illegal immigrants bill is a very rare case.
    2. The time point is relevant because they only have a limited time to debate bills. As of know they don't get through a large chunk of bills and if this were implemented it would take away a lot of time therefore decreasing the limited number of bills they already go through.
    3. One thing you misunderstand is I like this idea a lot but I don't think it's workable.

  3. #73
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Seen
    02-12-11 @ 12:32 PM
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    939

    Re: Should politicians be required by law to read the bill themselves before signing

    You also didn't state a way to enforce this. Who's going to be there when the politician reads it? You're going to be wasting their time too. And your "book report" idea won't work because they can just read this first page and say they like the idea on the first page.

  4. #74
    Sage
    jamesrage's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    A place where common sense exists
    Last Seen
    12-10-17 @ 09:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    31,067

    Re: Should politicians be required by law to read the bill themselves before signing

    Quote Originally Posted by pro-bipartisan View Post
    You also didn't state a way to enforce this.
    Mostly it would it be self enforcing. Politicians would police each other by using this ammo in elections against their oppenents


    Who's going to be there when the politician reads it?
    No one has to be there. Seeing how they no longer have the option of using a 3rd party to read it and they would be required by law to read they wouldn't be able to use the "I didn't" or I didn't know what was in it" excuse. Seeing how there would time allotted for each bill depending on length they would have plenty of time to read it.


    And your "book report" idea won't work because they can just read this first page and say they like the idea on the first page.

    All it will take is a reporter or political commentator asking the politician a question over something obscure in the bill to make politicians wary of not reading the bill before voting in order to avoid future embarrassment.


    2. The time point is relevant because they only have a limited time to debate bills.
    It is not relevant.As long as they read and fully understand what they signing I have no problem with them not voting for a bunch of bills they didn't bother reading.

    As of know they don't get through a large chunk of bills and if this were implemented it would take away a lot of time therefore decreasing the limited number of bills they already go through.
    What you said is not a problem.I would rather 1 bill they actually read get voted on than for 10 bills to be passed without them reading it. IF they do not have time to read then they shouldn't pass it.
    "A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murder is less to fear"

    Cicero Marcus Tullius

  5. #75
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Seen
    02-12-11 @ 12:32 PM
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    939

    Re: Should politicians be required by law to read the bill themselves before signing

    Quote Originally Posted by jamesrage View Post
    Mostly it would it be self enforcing. Politicians would police each other by using this ammo in elections against their oppenents



    No one has to be there. Seeing how they no longer have the option of using a 3rd party to read it and they would be required by law to read they wouldn't be able to use the "I didn't" or I didn't know what was in it" excuse. Seeing how there would time allotted for each bill depending on length they would have plenty of time to read it.





    All it will take is a reporter or political commentator asking the politician a question over something obscure in the bill to make politicians wary of not reading the bill before voting in order to avoid future embarrassment.




    It is not relevant.As long as they read and fully understand what they signing I have no problem with them not voting for a bunch of bills they didn't bother reading.



    What you said is not a problem.I would rather 1 bill they actually read get voted on than for 10 bills to be passed without them reading it. IF they do not have time to read then they shouldn't pass it.
    1. Regarding your self-enforcing point, opponents already criticize people now for what they vote for so it wouldn't be any different.

    2. Regarding your political commentator point, a lot of elected officials don't get interviewed regularly by the press and if a question is about something obscure then the politician may have forgotten about it if it's just a trivial fact.

  6. #76
    Sage
    jamesrage's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    A place where common sense exists
    Last Seen
    12-10-17 @ 09:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    31,067

    Re: Should politicians be required by law to read the bill themselves before signing

    Quote Originally Posted by pro-bipartisan View Post
    1. Regarding your self-enforcing point, opponents already criticize people now for what they vote for so it wouldn't be any different.
    As of right not it is not illegal for a politician to vote for a bill without first reading it. That would change if it was made illegal to vote for a bill without first reading it.

    2. Regarding your political commentator point, a lot of elected officials don't get interviewed regularly by the press and if a question is about something obscure then the politician may have forgotten about it if it's just a trivial fact.
    I sure some of the politicians who seemed to have a problem with reading bills would be the first ones to be interview or at least "coerced" into a interview.
    "A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murder is less to fear"

    Cicero Marcus Tullius

  7. #77
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Seen
    02-12-11 @ 12:32 PM
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    939

    Re: Should politicians be required by law to read the bill themselves before signing

    Quote Originally Posted by jamesrage View Post
    As of right not it is not illegal for a politician to vote for a bill without first reading it. That would change if it was made illegal to vote for a bill without first reading it.



    I sure some of the politicians who seemed to have a problem with reading bills would be the first ones to be interview or at least "coerced" into a interview.
    1. How would a person's opponent know they didn't read it? They could only criticize the fact of which side they voted which already happens now.

    2. There are 535 members of Congress do you expect even a majority of people to be interviewed every time there is a new bill?

  8. #78
    Sage
    jamesrage's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    A place where common sense exists
    Last Seen
    12-10-17 @ 09:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    31,067

    Re: Should politicians be required by law to read the bill themselves before signing

    Quote Originally Posted by pro-bipartisan View Post
    1. How would a person's opponent know they didn't read it?
    They could only criticize the fact of which side they voted which already happens now.
    Someone claiming to support something signs a bill that has something in it that contradicts his alleged view would be a indicator that person voted for a bill he didn't read. Questions would arise either he is a liar and hypocrite or he didn't read the bill.If he admits to not reading the bill then he would face being thrown in jail.IF he admits he is a hypocrite his rivals would use it against him in the primaries or his opponents would use it as ammo against him.

    2. There are 535 members of Congress do you expect even a majority of people to be interviewed every time there is a new bill?
    Start with the ones who have a history of claiming to not have read the bill or the whole bill and then work down to the ones who sign bills that have something in them they are ideologically opposed to.
    "A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murder is less to fear"

    Cicero Marcus Tullius

  9. #79
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Seen
    02-12-11 @ 12:32 PM
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    939

    Re: Should politicians be required by law to read the bill themselves before signing

    Quote Originally Posted by jamesrage View Post
    Someone claiming to support something signs a bill that has something in it that contradicts his alleged view would be a indicator that person voted for a bill he didn't read. Questions would arise either he is a liar and hypocrite or he didn't read the bill.If he admits to not reading the bill then he would face being thrown in jail.IF he admits he is a hypocrite his rivals would use it against him in the primaries or his opponents would use it as ammo against him.


    Start with the ones who have a history of claiming to not have read the bill or the whole bill and then work down to the ones who sign bills that have something in them they are ideologically opposed to.
    Your first point happens now it wouldn't be any different. Besides, you could just read the first page and say you like what's on it and that would get you off the hook for reading the whole bill since you have a reason as to why you like. Also, who would the politician speak to about the bill? The press? He could refuse to speak to them.

    Once again, you won't be able to interview everyone who's against this idea everytime there's a new bill.

  10. #80
    User BoyKagome's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Michigan
    Last Seen
    08-18-09 @ 10:39 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    32

    Re: Should politicians be required by law to read the bill themselves before signing

    It's their job to read a bill and make a decision that is best suited to help the American people while following the constitution. If they have not read the bill, then how can they know if they are making a decision based on their job description? Maybe the more important question is shouldn't a bill in it's final form have a full week to be reviewed before it can be voted on?

Page 8 of 16 FirstFirst ... 678910 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •