I created an account just to post this idea. The fluff and special interests ruin bills. If Congress had to vote on one idea, there would be less stonewalling.
16 Likes
While I like this concept, there maybe cases where arbitrary constraints like page count would be counter productive or lead to endless quarreling. I.e. Is the bill really single issue or not could get hairy.
If the goal is ensuring understanding of a bill prior to voting, what if one had to pass a test showing at least 80% comprehension before being able to cast a vote?
This would incentivize bill writers to draft easily digestible proposals.
9 Likes
Representative Thomas Massie has been very vocal in his opposition to the omnibus spending bills that get forced through and I would encourage anyone to watch his interview with Tucker Carlson. He has proposed a bill that would allegedly solve this issue in certain ways.
16 Likes
Love this idea to cut down on the DC corruption! - After doing this why don’t we just let each state Governor place a vote representing his/her state majority on the bill? Congress & Senate need a good haircut! What do, “WE THE PEOPLE” need them for anymore? I have heard that back in the old days the only reason they had them was because of the lack of fast transportation and communication devices. It’s 2024 now ! Those problems no longer exist, so why do we even need all of those people in DC?
12 Likes
Looks like I’m not the only one that thinks this is obvious.
8 Likes
Absolutely! This is a must!
4 Likes
Yes! Transparency!
3 Likes
I hope this idea gets more attention.
This was one of the suggestions mentioned in, Extortion, by Peter Schweizer.
The book is eye opening and talks about a number of ways to address political corruption. Extortion
9 Likes
“Bills should include a way to measure success/effectiveness”
This is an underrated point, and could be elaborated further to include consequences for a bill not achieving the intended goal, like an automatic repeal of the bill.
Forcing one to specify the objective goal means actually defining a mutually agreeable objective goal, and crafting legislation effective enough to achieve that mutually desirable outcome.
23 Likes
They must sign to verify that they’ve read the bill before voting on it!
17 Likes
10 pages is more than enough for any bill. If you can’t fully explain what you need and why you need it in 10 pages, then you are trying to hide something.
Look at the US Constitution. It’s not 100 pages long.
There is power in concise speech and treason hidden in blather.
19 Likes
All laws must sunset after 10-15 years. If they are great laws, they can be renewed.
10 Likes
[Duplicate post.
How to condense the same posts?]
8 Likes
Don’t limit pages but rather;
All subject matter of the bill must be related to the subject title and it’s immediate affects.
7 Likes
Perhaps we the people must give a thought to using some type of LLM to review a Bill and catch when more than one issue/subject/target/provison is present. Or if there is a rider snuck in at the last moment. Sometimes we humans overlook things and machines can help here.
Either way, once a review is done (be it human or machine or both) the Bill is locked and must not contain modification after that point. I’d suggest some type of official seal (digital or paper-wise) which notes the bill is reviewed on this date and anything after is null and void. No exceptions.
The reading aloud is a good point too. Then we the people can compare what is being read matches what was locked/sealed. If it does not match, the Bill is null and void and may be re-submitted at a later point.
If the non-matching addtion was intentional, the person(s) responsible for the non-match are removed from office, for life.
If the non-matching was a mistake (we are human, it happens) the person(s) responsible are penalized in some manner (that can be drawn up as these thoughts/changes progress) congruent to the severity of the non-match entry. You may only make a mistake so many times and severe infractions of this will result in removal from office, for life.
They work for the people and may find another form of work in life if they do not agree to these changes.
Thoughts?
14 Likes
The fact that We the People have to suggest this as a good idea shows how corrupt and fallen our country is.
17 Likes
Totally agree!
3 Likes
What about adding in there - anyone that is paid by public funds cannot lie to the American People?
10 Likes
Absolutely.
1 Like
I love this because the title is always deceptive and your mind gets scrambled by all the obfuscation. (Patriot Act should have been called the surveillance and airport molestation of citizens and other nefarious machinations act)
12 Likes