Ever buy a house? Remember signing all that paperwork at the bank?
Let’s just say you’re there, a couple of hours before five, and there’s a stack of paper, maybe 1200 pages worth. You don’t have a hope of reading it all before closing, and you have to close today. You’re understandably nervous, since you’re signing a commitment that’s going to impact the next few decades of your life. So for a little reassurance you ask the mortgage guy, “So, does anyone actually read all this stuff?”
How would you react if his response was to laugh and say, “of course not, if anyone actually read this, we’d never get anyone to sign it.”
9 Comments
Steve Buchheit · July 14, 2009 at 8:21 am
Well, that’s not exactly what he was saying. And the article ignores that most congressmen and senators have aids who are policy wonks who do read the bills, and have kept up with what comes out of the committees. There’s few things that they don’t keep track of. This is what’s know as the executive function of the elected official. This is why when you call your representative, if they’re unavailable, ask to speak to the aid who advises them on the topic you want to talk about rather than just leaving a message.
Having the actual representative read the bills would essentially roadblock the legislature, require a revamping of electioneering (not exactly a bad thing), and prevent any work (including budgets) from getting done. The supporters of the movements are either naive about how their government actually functions and how people get work done, or their intent is to lock down the legislature and prevent any progress.
Now, what I’d really like to see is something that stops committee meetings from being attempts at making the best sound byte and getting back to actual work. Oh, and if you’re in the committee Pay Attention to what’s going on (good thing I’m not Sgt. at Arms for Committees, I’d be whacking people left and right).
(as full disclosure, I do read all the bills we pass, but then the longest of them aren’t more than 100 pages, most are less than three – also, I did read all the papers in my closing package, much to the consternation of the title company).
Steve Buchheit · July 14, 2009 at 8:22 am
Forgot to clarify, what he actually said was, “If anyone actually read this stuff, we’d never have time for them to sign it before the close of business.”
S Andrew Swann · July 14, 2009 at 12:02 pm
I find it very unlikely that anyone’s staff (with the possible exception of the staffs directly connected to the committees that produce these bloated tumors of legislation) have the time or ability to review the final version of these bills before a vote’s called. There’s a reason hundred page amendments are slapped onto these things in the middle of the night before the vote, and it ain’t transparency. Also, it’s one thing for a representative to delegate his or her duties to their staff (and, damn it, their duty is to read and understand the crap they pass into law) it’s quite another to delegate their duties to the party leadership. The latter is abdicating their responsibility to their district, and denying representation to the people who voted for them.
michelle · July 14, 2009 at 2:57 pm
Obama promised we’d have 5 days to go to a website and read bills before they were voted on. Now, I understand he didn’t really have the authority to make that BS campaign promise, but let’s put it in perspective. Not only do we not get 5 days, but the last bill I heard about was put forth at 3 AM on the day it was to be voted on AND it was LONGER than Atlas Shrugged, which isn’t exactly a novella….How many ‘policy wonks’ would a senator have to have in order for them to get through all of that? Did I mention 3 AM? THREE-FRIGGIN-A-M. That, in my opinion, is BS. And they’ve been doing it for a long time. Democrats AND Republicans, both.
S Andrew Swann · July 14, 2009 at 8:28 pm
Oh and on the “Legislative Paralysis” canard. Even if we assume that’s a bad thing, apparently the senate is quite fine pushing back votes as needed. . .
Are we really trying to say that giving five days between a final bill and a vote is an unacceptable delay in the people’s business? You know, I could read Atlas Shrugged in a week, if it was, like, my job. . .
ryan · July 15, 2009 at 4:34 am
Kucinich takes a lot of heat for not approving a lot of bills, even those that nominally seem within the scope of his interests. He explains that he “actually reads them”. He actually gains some knowledge of the riders hidden in them.
as for modern business contracts and marketing: economic theory doesn’t catch up with them. most people aren’t very reasonable or logical most of the time. communications technology – from advances in printing, photocopying, the telegraph, the typewriter – will always increase the amount of legal and managerial tedium that sharpsters build up to put a premium on educational qualifications.
michelle · July 15, 2009 at 10:35 am
I will give Kucinich some credit for that. You know, even though I disagree with just about every position Kucinich has ever taken, I still give him a ton of credit for actually taking his job seriously and trying to do what he thinks is right for his constituents. I may not agree with his assessments, but he’s actually better than about 99% of the politicians in regards to actually sticking to his principles. Ron Paul would be another example of a politician who isn’t playing the ‘game’. We need more Ron Pauls and Dennis Kucinichs in the congress and senate.
Steve Buchheit · July 15, 2009 at 11:58 am
If the representatives needed to read all the bills, they wouldn’t get much more done than the budget (which last I remember was published in several volumes because the print shop can’t physically bind them all together). Especially with all the changes going through the process. And when I say “only work done” I mean that the representatives wouldn’t be able to meet constituents, work on their own committees, work for constituent requests, AND campaign for the next re-election. To run a modern campaign, it requires at least two years of fund-raising. For Congressmen that leaves no time from swearing in to starting the next campaign, for Presidents it’s two years (although there have been shots over the bow that the 2012 campaigns have already started), and Senators get three years (as Senate seat campaigns cost more to run as they are state-wide).
Also, those aids’ jobs include tracking important legislation while it’s in committee. So even though the bill is introduced to the floor late in the evening, it’s been worked on an debated for several weeks beforehand. See current Healthcare Legislation bills, all are being worked on, none have been introduced to the floor yet.
And, the Patriot Act (the buggaboo of us liberals) had been discussed for eight months before it came to the floor for a vote. However, it was called the “Drug Enforcement Act”, I think the difference between that legislation that was shot down and the Patriot Act was 16 pages.
So, one, Legislation is not our representatives’ only duty, even if we have major campaign reform. Two, there’s a lot of discussion and debate about bills while they’re in committee (which is the function of the committees). And three, Obama has done much to reopen government (not enough, but a heck of a lot). As for promises they can’t keep, I’ll remind everybody that all presidential candidates promise to cut the budget and end waste. They don’t have the power to do so (see current fight over the F-22 program).Considering the openess of the stimulus spending and the public tracking of that, it’s a major step forward.
Steve Buchheit · July 15, 2009 at 12:09 pm
I should mention here that I also believe in the responsibility of command. The argument of “I didn’t know that provision was in there” is not a defense. It does mean their staff didn’t do their job properly (either by missing the provision, or by not identifying it as being important to the representative). However, it’s the representative’s fault, not the staff’s. Being in command means you’re responsible for the actions of your subordinates. Even if they had no specific orders to do something. That’s why they get the big bucks and the office.
Comments are closed.