If I could write and pass one single law

[Phoebe Loosinhouse]

it would be a law that says every single Congressperson and Senator has to PERSONALLY initial each and every paragraph of pending piece of legislation. That initial signifies that they HAVE A CLUE ABOUT THE LAWS THEY PASS!!! Is that too much too ask for?

They are paid to be OUR legislative representatives. They are not paid to campaign. They are not paid to take junkets paid for by lobbyists. They are paid to make and pass laws.

I would also require that EVERY provision have a notation on the righthand side as to who in particular is the AUTHOR of that EXACT wording. I want accountability. If legislation comes out of a committee,than some notation like "CA"(committee approved) could be used with the Chairperson of the Committee assuming all future responsibility. No anonymous provisions would be allowed. Every provision should have a responsible party who can explain everything about why the provision was drafted in its passed form.

[Mariana]

1. This has ALWAYS pissed me off!

They say they "didn't know" what's in the legislation they voted for as if that'a some kind of valid excuse! No it isn't, you jackasses, and you have a hell of a nerve putting your faces out and telling us how you DIDN'T DO YOUR FUCKING JOB as if there's nothing wrong with that. Assholes. Thing is, it's been going on for so long that this is considered the normal way to pass laws. I think they really have NO IDEA why this is wrong.

I'd make it a Constitional Amendment, though. Otherwise, they can write in a million exceptions and/or write a new law killing the requirements altogether any old time.

[dem629]

2. Wouldn't Congresshumans do what most people do?

Initial without reading it?

[1]

6. this could be done online...

the congressmen could check the "i have read and accept these terms and conditions" box just below that long scrolling text area, before clicking the "ok" button.

just like most folks do everyday...

:rofl:

[No.23]

3. Then I would probably lobby you to hold off on that, until...

you first establish: 1) public financing of all national elections; and, 2) term limits.

Do that first, and you'll have a whole different mindset in Congress.

[pinto]

4. I support your #1, disagree on #2.

We need to publicly finance federal elections. The benefits are clear, opens access to more candidates and removes the taint, real or perceived, of big money. It would also result in less big media (costly) campaigns, hence less visibility, which may have the unintended consequence of political extremists having more influence than they do now.

I don't support term limits at all. Nationally, state or local. Public elections are *already* term limits. I'm good with that. If there's a problem with the election process, let's fix *that*. Term limits are an obviously self-defined yet short-sighted fix.

[No.23]

5. This obviously deserves another thread.

On term limits, that is.

I'm a big fan of it.

Perhaps we'll dance on another dance floor soon.

[pinto]

7. Yeah, it's a good discussion item, imho. Lot's of points on both sides.

:hi:

[OwnedByFerrets]

8. If I had that wish, it would be for federally funded campaign financing...

and that if ANY official took ONE PENNY from a lobbyist or a corporation, they would go to prison.

[valerief]

9. I'd outlaw money. Create a resource-based economy. How? I dunno.

Let the brainiacs figure that out. Just get rid of rich people.

[area51]

10. One law

I'd make a law making it impossible that congresspeople have better healthcare access/afforability than regular Americans can get; the current system is the reason why we have a broken healthcare system and rich congressppl have no interest in changing the system. They literally have no clue what's like for the average American.

[ColbertWatcher]

11. The Loosinhouse Accountability Act of 2009! Has a nice ring to it! k+r, n/t