Transparency in Government Act 2008
Title II - Enhancing Public Access to the Work of Congressional Committees, Legislative Information, and Votes
Sec. 204. Full disclosure of non-emergency legislation and amendments online 72 hours before a vote.
-
The rules of the House of Representatives and the Standing Rules of the Senate are amended by inserting the following:
`(1) It shall not be in order to consider in the House or the Senate a measure or matter, including bills and amendments, until 72 hours (excluding Saturdays, Sundays, and holidays except when the relevant chamber is in session on such a day) after the text of such measure or matter (and, if the measure or matter is reported, the text of all accompanying reports) have been made available to Members, Delegates, the Resident Commissioner, Senators, and the general public pursuant to subparagraph (3);
For purposes of this paragraph, a measure or matter is made available to the general public as of the time it is posted by the Secretary of the Senate or Clerk of the House on their respective Web sites in a format that can be searched by text.
`(3) This rule may be waived by a vote of two-thirds of the Members voting, a quorum being present.’.
General Comments on Transparency in Government Act 2008
Let's not create new databases here! (grin) To be considered public the bills should be a) posted on THOMAS (i.e. searchable) and b) posted on GPO (for full text PDFs).
The congresspersons should also have to sign a statement to state that they indeed have read each and every bill they are about to vote on. Maybe that will shrink them a bit.
There is a "Read the Bills Act" floating around, put forward by Downsize DC you guys might want to partner with. http://tinyurl.com/3k6n9 />
72 hours notice? Post a bill 72 hours in advance. I need time to work on amendments so you need another 72 hours for the posting of amendments. Wait, there's more. How about amendments to amendments? Second degree amendments are in order so now you need yet another 72 hours.
If the proposal is designed so that no legislation can pass, it will work. If you allow any loophole anywhere, then it can be evaded.
There Should be no exception even with 2/3 majority and a quroum present! Also I would like to see a ban on any amendment which does not dierctly modify the bill being amended. If the amendment does not affect the bill, it should not be allowed as an amendment! It should be required to be introduced as a new bill!!
This will create an effective filibuster of, eh, any bill someone REALLY doesn't like. They just have to add a new amendment every couple of days, meaning the vote gets delayed another three days. This should be more along the lines of
"The House or Senate shall not vote on any bill unless it has been publicly available for 72 hours. During that 72 hour period, the bill cannot be amended."
Then how do you decide when that 72 hours begins? This is a great idea. It's just unworkable in its current form.
Thank you for including this in the package. Some thoughts:
1) Clarify the purpose of this language. It is too simple as a bill/resolution in Congress, but too complicated as rallying language.
2) The House and Senate have significantly different rules. One needs to amend the chambers' respective standing rules precisely (as did the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1970).
3) Precise language amending the standing rules of the House to require 72 hours has been introduced in the 110th Congress by Rep. Brian Baird (D-WA) as H.Res. 504, which has attracted bipartisan cosponsors. Many of the issues noted by others above are resolved in H.Res. 504.
4) No language is perfect or without loopholes. The House can waive any rule (even the 2/3 majority requirement) by a simple majority, thought it takes extra steps. Enforcement will only happen when the political cost of waiving the 72 hours rule is too high to make it worth it.
5) It is not practical (nor passable) to apply the text to everything, especially amendments. Also, existing House rules contain important exceptions to the existing three-day rule, which should probably be retained on both policy and political grounds. After the 72 hours concept is instituted and enforced for a time, then one could look at the existing exceptions and see if there were policy and political rationale for closing them.
Thank you again for including this idea in the package.