Congressional leaders fight against posting bills online

Link

By: Susan Ferrechio
Chief Congressional Correspondent
October 6, 2009


As Congress lurches closer to a decision on an enormous overhaul of the American health care system, pressure is mounting on legislative leaders to make the final bill available online for citizens to read before a vote.
Lawmakers were given just hours to examine the $789 billion stimulus plan, sweeping climate-change legislation and a $700 billion bailout package before final votes.
While most Americans normally ignore parliamentary detail, with health care looming, voters are suddenly paying attention. The Senate is expected to vote on a health bill in the weeks to come, representing months of work and stretching to hundreds of pages. And as of now, there is no assurance that members of the public, or even the senators themselves, will be given the chance to read the legislation before a vote.
"The American people are now suspicious of not only the lawmakers, but the process they hide behind to do their work," said Michael Franc, president of government relations for the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank.
At town hall meetings across the country this past summer, the main topic was health care, but there was a strong undercurrent of anger over the way Congress rushed through passage of the stimulus, global warming and bank bailout bills without seeming to understand the consequences. The stimulus bill, for example, was 1,100 pages long and made available to Congress and the public just 13 hours before lawmakers voted on it. The bill has failed to provide the promised help to the job market, and there was outrage when it was discovered that the legislation included an amendment allowing American International Group, a bailout recipient, to give out millions in employee bonuses.

Click to expand...

Hmmm, now why wouldn't Congress want this bill online?

Of course they do!!...:rofl

Luckily support for H.R. 554 is gaining support on both sides of the isle.

H.Res.554: Amending the Rules of the House of Representatives to require that legislation and conference reports... OpenCongress


Sponsor

Representative
Brian Baird

D-WA
View Co-Sponsors (164)Hide Co-Sponsors

o Rep. Robert Aderholt [R, AL-4]
o Rep. Rodney Alexander [R, LA-5]
o Rep. Michael Arcuri [D, NY-24]
o Rep. Steve Austria [R, OH-7]
o Rep. Michele Bachmann [R, MN-6]
o Rep. John Barrow [D, GA-12]
o Rep. Roscoe Bartlett [R, MD-6]
o Rep. Joe Barton [R, TX-6]
o Rep. Judy Biggert [R, IL-13]
o Rep. Brian Bilbray [R, CA-50]
o Rep. Gus Bilirakis [R, FL-9]
o Rep. Rob Bishop [R, UT-1]
o Rep. Marsha Blackburn [R, TN-7]
o Rep. Roy Blunt [R, MO-7]
o Rep. John Boehner [R, OH-8]
o Rep. Jo Bonner [R, AL-1]
o Rep. Dan Boren [D, OK-2]
o Rep. Leonard Boswell [D, IA-3]
o Rep. Charles Boustany [R, LA-7]
o Rep. Kevin Brady [R, TX-8]
o Rep. Bobby Bright [D, AL-2]
o Rep. Henry Brown [R, SC-1]
o Rep. Virginia Brown-Waite [R, FL-5]
o Rep. Michael Burgess [R, TX-26]
o Rep. Dan Burton [R, IN-5]
o Rep. John Campbell [R, CA-48]
o Rep. Anh Cao [R, LA-2]
o Rep. Christopher Carney [D, PA-10]
o Rep. John Carter [R, TX-31]
o Rep. Bill Cassidy [R, LA-6]
o Rep. Jason Chaffetz [R, UT-3]
o Rep. Ben Chandler [D, KY-6]
o Rep. Howard Coble [R, NC-6]
o Rep. Steve Cohen [D, TN-9]
o Rep. Tom Cole [R, OK-4]
o Rep. K. Conaway [R, TX-11]
o Rep. Jim Costa [D, CA-20]
o Rep. Ander Crenshaw [R, FL-4]
o Rep. John Culberson [R, TX-7]
o Rep. Kathleen Dahlkemper [D, PA-3]
o Rep. Lincoln Davis [D, TN-4]
o Rep. Nathan Deal [R, GA-9]
o Rep. Peter DeFazio [D, OR-4]
o Rep. Charles Dent [R, PA-15]
o Rep. John Duncan [R, TN-2]
o Rep. Thomas Edwards [D, TX-17]
o Rep. Vernon Ehlers [R, MI-3]
o Rep. Mary Fallin [R, OK-5]
o Rep. Jeff Flake [R, AZ-6]
o Rep. John Fleming [R, LA-4]
o Rep. James Forbes [R, VA-4]
o Rep. Jeffrey Fortenberry [R, NE-1]
o Rep. Virginia Foxx [R, NC-5]
o Rep. Scott Garrett [R, NJ-5]
o Rep. Jim Gerlach [R, PA-6]
o Rep. John Gingrey [R, GA-11]
o Rep. Louis Gohmert [R, TX-1]
o Rep. Robert Goodlatte [R, VA-6]
o Rep. Kay Granger [R, TX-12]
o Rep. Samuel Graves [R, MO-6]
o Rep. Raymond Green [D, TX-29]
o Rep. Parker Griffith [D, AL-5]
o Rep. Ralph Hall [R, TX-4]
o Rep. Gregg Harper [R, MS-3]
o Rep. Jeb Hensarling [R, TX-5]
o Rep. Walter Herger [R, CA-2]
o Rep. Peter Hoekstra [R, MI-2]
o Rep. Bob Inglis [R, SC-4]
o Rep. Darrell Issa [R, CA-49]
o Rep. Jesse Jackson [D, IL-2]
o Rep. Lynn Jenkins [R, KS-2]
o Rep. Timothy Johnson [R, IL-15]
o Rep. Samuel Johnson [R, TX-3]
o Rep. Walter Jones [R, NC-3]
o Rep. Marcy Kaptur [D, OH-9]
o Rep. Peter King [R, NY-3]
o Rep. Steve King [R, IA-5]
o Rep. Jack Kingston [R, GA-1]
o Rep. Mark Kirk [R, IL-10]
o Rep. Larry Kissell [D, NC-8]
o Rep. John Kline [R, MN-2]
o Rep. Frank Kratovil [D, MD-1]
o Rep. Doug Lamborn [R, CO-5]
o Rep. Leonard Lance [R, NJ-7]
o Rep. Thomas Latham [R, IA-4]
o Rep. Christopher Lee [R, NY-26]
o Rep. Daniel Lipinski [D, IL-3]
o Rep. Frank LoBiondo [R, NJ-2]
o Rep. David Loebsack [D, IA-2]
o Rep. Blaine Luetkemeyer [R, MO-9]
o Rep. Daniel Maffei [D, NY-25]
o Rep. Carolyn Maloney [D, NY-14]
o Rep. Kenny Marchant [R, TX-24]
o Rep. James Marshall [D, GA-8]
o Rep. Eric Massa [D, NY-29]
o Rep. Jim Matheson [D, UT-2]
o Rep. Michael McCaul [R, TX-10]
o Rep. Thaddeus McCotter [R, MI-11]
o Rep. Howard McKeon [R, CA-25]
o Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers [R, WA-5]
o Rep. Kendrick Meek [D, FL-17]
o Rep. Charles Melancon [D, LA-3]
o Rep. John Mica [R, FL-7]
o Rep. Michael Michaud [D, ME-2]
o Rep. Jeff Miller [R, FL-1]
o Rep. Candice Miller [R, MI-10]
o Rep. Walter Minnick [D, ID-1]
o Rep. Dennis Moore [D, KS-3]
o Rep. Jerry Moran [R, KS-1]
o Rep. Randy Neugebauer [R, TX-19]
o Rep. Pete Olson [R, TX-22]
o Rep. Ronald Paul [R, TX-14]
o Rep. Erik Paulsen [R, MN-3]
o Rep. Mike Pence [R, IN-6]
o Rep. Thomas Petri [R, WI-6]
o Rep. Joseph Pitts [R, PA-16]
o Rep. Todd Platts [R, PA-19]
o Rep. Bill Posey [R, FL-15]
o Rep. Adam Putnam [R, FL-12]
o Rep. Mike Quigley [D, IL-5]
o Rep. George Radanovich [R, CA-19]
o Rep. Dennis Rehberg [R, MT-0]
o Rep. Dave Reichert [R, WA-8]
o Rep. Phil Roe [R, TN-1]
o Rep. Michael Rogers [R, MI-8]
o Rep. Harold Rogers [R, KY-5]
o Rep. Michael Rogers [R, AL-3]
o Rep. Thomas Rooney [R, FL-16]
o Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen [R, FL-18]
o Rep. Mike Ross [D, AR-4]
o Rep. Paul Ryan [R, WI-1]
o Rep. Mark Schauer [D, MI-7]
o Rep. Jean Schmidt [R, OH-2]
o Rep. Peter Sessions [R, TX-32]
o Rep. John Shadegg [R, AZ-3]
o Rep. John Shimkus [R, IL-19]
o Rep. Heath Shuler [D, NC-11]
o Rep. Michael Simpson [R, ID-2]
o Rep. Christopher Smith [R, NJ-4]
o Rep. Lamar Smith [R, TX-21]
o Rep. Adam Smith [D, WA-9]
o Rep. Mark Souder [R, IN-3]
o Rep. Jackie Speier [D, CA-12]
o Rep. Clifford Stearns [R, FL-6]
o Rep. John Sullivan [R, OK-1]
o Rep. Gene Taylor [D, MS-4]
o Rep. Lee Terry [R, NE-2]
o Rep. C. Thompson [D, CA-1]
o Rep. Glenn Thompson [R, PA-5]
o Rep. William Thornberry [R, TX-13]
o Rep. Todd Tiahrt [R, KS-4]
o Rep. Patrick Tiberi [R, OH-12]
o Rep. Michael Turner [R, OH-3]
o Rep. Frederick Upton [R, MI-6]
o Rep. Greg Walden [R, OR-2]
o Rep. Timothy Walz [D, MN-1]
o Rep. Zach Wamp [R, TN-3]
o Rep. Lynn Westmoreland [R, GA-3]
o Rep. Edward Whitfield [R, KY-1]
o Rep. Addison Wilson [R, SC-2]
o Rep. Rob Wittman [R, VA-1]
o Rep. Frank Wolf [R, VA-10]
o Rep. Donald Young [R, AK-0]
o Rep. C. W. Young [R, FL-10]

Except in the case of true emergency legislation (which a health reform bill is NOT), why wouldn't anyone be in favor of this?

I thought at least one lib would show up and explain this idea of not wanting the bill online.

American said:

I thought at least one lib would show up and explain this idea of not wanting the bill online.

Click to expand...

Maybe posting bills online is an issue that both sides support.

American said:

I thought at least one lib would show up and explain this idea of not wanting the bill online.

Click to expand...

LOL...
They're waiting for marching orders.

.

jamesrage said:

Luckily support for H.R. 554 is gaining support on both sides of the isle.

Click to expand...

72 hours is not enough time imo. I personally think that it should be a week long wait. With the exception of emergency bills of course....TRUE emergency bills.

Kal'Stang said:

72 hours is not enough time imo. I personally think that it should be a week long wait.

Click to expand...

I think three days should be a minimum with a day added per 50-100 pages.A thousand pages 10-20 days posted online before voting.

With the exception of emergency bills of course....TRUE emergency bills

Click to expand...

What do you define as a true emergency bills?

American said:

Link


Hmmm, now why wouldn't Congress want this bill online?

Click to expand...

They are against it because it would allow a means by which the American public could view the bill and find all of the pork hidden in it.

Congress doesn't want its pork exposed.

Show the bill, for all I care. The only problem I can foresee is the general public freaking out over things they don't understand, which is quite common.

Vader said:

They are against it because it would allow a means by which the American public could view the bill and find all of the pork hidden in it.

Congress doesn't want its pork exposed.

Click to expand...

That would be the butt portion, right?

Smoke[MaxX] said:

Show the bill, for all I care. The only problem I can foresee is the general public freaking out over things they don't understand, which is quite common.

Click to expand...

Like millions for a mouse? The libs think the average American is stupid which is why they think they can get away with anything... I got news for them.

jamesrage said:

I think three days should be a minimum with a day added per 50-100 pages.A thousand pages 10-20 days posted online before voting.

Click to expand...

That would be fine with me.

jamesrage said:

What do you define as a true emergency bills?

Click to expand...

Invasion, natural disaster, things like that. Things where an immediate response is a necessity.

Crunch said:

That would be the butt portion, right?

Click to expand...

I would say its three quarters of the bill. Congress just loves pork belly.