Unfortunately, that’s not how politics works.
Hear, hear.
2 Likes
What difference would that make? It would probably result in MORE pages. And it’s not like a large bill isn’t broken up into sections.
It’s infrastructure. There’s nothing complicated about it.
This set of roads need repairs performed. We will a lot this amount of money to complete the job. We can discuss extra funding in the case it runs over cost estimates at a later time.
It’s only complicated because our partisan idiot politicians make it complicated.
It would hopefully lessen the amount of useless unrelated spending in the bills. Since everyone would see it immediately.
Considering it is tax payers footing the bills, it should be written in a language that the average citizen can understand. I’ve tried to read bills before. Unless you’re a lawyer it’s completely unreadable.
Who am I kidding? These buffoons in congress will never change.
“Useless” is in the eyes of the beholder. That’s the point.
I may find it important to fix the bridge by my house - but “useless” to fix the bridge near your house, because I’ll probably never drive over it.
So go to law school. That’s why I did.
1 Like
I wouldn’t have an issue with both of our bridges being fixed. It’s related to infrastructure.
I have an issue with bills that have things that are mostly unrelated to what the bill is really supposed to be about.
And I was never going to be able to afford law school. Still can’t. If I had more money than I knew what to do with id probably go not to practice but just so I could learn the ins and outs of our common law system.
Horse-trading is how politics works. Always has been, and always will be.
That’s exactly what I did - went to law school to understand the law. And I didn’t need all the money in the world to do it, either - as long as you’ve got reasonably good grades and a decent LSAT score, you can get decent financial aid.
I got a better law. Politicians who don’t vote, don’t get paid. Must be a yes or no vote. No present allow.
I don’t agree with this, either.
1 Like
We could just start by taxing billionaire wealth down to multimillionaire wealth, adjust the money supply accordingly, and have enough in the coffers to, I dunno, try to catch up with South Korea, Nederland or Deutscheland.
That is a ridiculous proposal that could be easily circumvented by using, for example, a page size of 4A0 with a font size of 6?
1 Like
Why would one need a 20 page bill to provide funding to replace the 20 most dangerous bridges?
1 Like
I heard the same thing from that weird bush down the street that shakes, and smells like pee.
Yucca, and Franklin right?
The cause is because any bill is a legal document and therefore everything has to be described in legal terms which means that it has to be bullet-proof from every angle. And our legal verbiage has gotten to be very long and involved. I agree with you in premise. But in practical terms I don’t think that it is doable.
The only new law we need today
Supreme Court limit 50 pages get it, but the limit for an appendix I believe is 250…
The Briefs do get smaller, but…
Less is certainly more, in writing; to the point.
Genius for Legislation is rare in the world.
Could be a start, probably how it started, less than 50 pages I mean…
Every time you hear someone say “we otta have a law” … any law, but particularly affecting Congress … just think about who writes and passes the laws. Congress is never going to pass a law that limits themselves.
Here is what difference it would make. Would any politician sponsor a bill to spend millions trying to convince women to become tractor trailer drivers? Why even bother? Any woman can choose this field already if she wants. Yet most Senators will vote for this nonsense. It’s in the stupid infrastructure monstrosity.
If they want to know why women don’t want to drive trucks, why not just ask AOC and the squad? I think they still identify as women? Right?
I think congress should propose doing this. But the won’t.
Dialectic no.
Rhetoric yes.
That is the problem, no?
Yes.
Can hide goodies in Rhetoric, but never in Dialectic.
More words, more sentences, more sentences, more paragraphs, more paragraphs, well you get it…
Rhetoric.
