Y'all ain't reading this bill neither, Chumps.

[JoeTheJuggler]

You are.

First, I don't think you are exactly applying a straw man argument.

What you are doing is

• taking a blurred, imprecise misunderstanding of exactly what I said -
• Applying that against a burred and imprecise misunderstanding of what the committees in Congress do -
• And reaching blurred and imprecise mis conclusions.

Which is all too complicated, really. So you are working really hard at getting nowhere.

You're wrong.

It's really simple. The final form of the bill, in legaleze, should be publicly available for 72 hours before the final committee vote is taken, after which the bill moves to the chamber. Final form includes all amendments, yada yada yada.

And that means these votes that I've been reporting on over the last week or so could not be taken. You'd have an absurd final committee vote if this rule change had passed. (Actually you wouldn't since you'd never reach that point.) You'd have to have the several now rejected amendments proposing a public option, and all the other ones. Again, you'd basically have to have a "final vote" on hundreds if not thousands of separate versions of the bill.

By the way. The bill creating the Interstate Highway System in the early 1950s was the largest construction project in the history of man. It was a whole 17 pages.

How long was the Medicare Reform bill of 2003 and the Energy Policy Act of 2005?

So why not stop the lecturing on why we can't do this, why that's too complicated, and why such and such is impossible to understand.

Wise up.

Because you're wrong.

 

[mhaze]

You're wrong.


And that means these votes that I've been reporting on over the last week or so could not be taken.....

No, it does NOT mean that.

....

"Now let us vote on Pork 1476."

Ayes have it.

1477..8132.

"Now let us vote on including PorK 1:8132" with this scheme".

Ayes have it.

Prepare legaleze.

72 hours public viewing.

Vote on porkubill.

 

[psychictv]

Want some warm milk and cookies?

PS: Losers always resort to ad hominems in the tail end of a discussion.

I can't believe I forgot to check back on this thread and missed this absolute gem of a reply! Cookies would be great mhaze. That's soy milk if you don't mind though. Thanks.

So you're internet-savvy enough to have had broadband in 1995 but you don't expect the same technological awareness from the Republican congressmen you support? Is that what you're saying? It makes sense. I mean, they are a bunch of backwards old racists who long to return to the days of Hoover.

 

[mhaze]

I can't believe I forgot to check back on this thread and missed this absolute gem of a reply! Cookies would be great mhaze. That's soy milk if you don't mind though. Thanks.

So you're internet-savvy enough to have had broadband in 1995 but you don't expect the same technological awareness from the Republican congressmen you support? Is that what you're saying? It makes sense. ...

Right. Congressmen are not geeks. I ignore your other proud professions of ignorance and bias.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/p...st-posting-bills-online-8340658-63557217.html

Lawmakers were given just hours to examine the $789 billion stimulus plan, sweeping climate-change legislation and a $700 billion bailout package before final votes.

"The American people are now suspicious of not only the lawmakers, but the process they hide behind to do their work," said Michael Franc, president of government relations for the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank.

At town hall meetings across the country this past summer, the main topic was health care, but there was a strong undercurrent of anger over the way Congress rushed through passage of the stimulus, global warming and bank bailout bills without seeming to understand the consequences. The stimulus bill, for example, was 1,100 pages long and made available to Congress and the public just 13 hours before lawmakers voted on it. The bill has failed to provide the promised help to the job market, and there was outrage when it was discovered that the legislation included an amendment allowing American International Group, a bailout recipient, to give out millions in employee bonuses.

"If someone had a chance to look at the bill, they would have found that out," said Lisa Rosenberg, who lobbies Congress on behalf of the Sunlight Foundation to bring more transparency to government.
The foundation has begun an effort to get Congress to post bills online, for all to see, 72 hours before lawmakers vote on them.

"It would give the public a chance to really digest and understand what is in the bill," Rosenberg said, "and communicate whether that is a good or a bad thing while there is still time to fix it."

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

Right. Congressmen are not geeks. I ignore your other proud professions of ignorance and bias.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/p...st-posting-bills-online-8340658-63557217.html

Lawmakers were given just hours to examine the $789 billion stimulus plan, sweeping climate-change legislation and a $700 billion bailout package before final votes.

"The American people are now suspicious of not only the lawmakers, but the process they hide behind to do their work," said Michael Franc, president of government relations for the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank.

At town hall meetings across the country this past summer, the main topic was health care, but there was a strong undercurrent of anger over the way Congress rushed through passage of the stimulus, global warming and bank bailout bills without seeming to understand the consequences. The stimulus bill, for example, was 1,100 pages long and made available to Congress and the public just 13 hours before lawmakers voted on it. The bill has failed to provide the promised help to the job market, and there was outrage when it was discovered that the legislation included an amendment allowing American International Group, a bailout recipient, to give out millions in employee bonuses.

"If someone had a chance to look at the bill, they would have found that out," said Lisa Rosenberg, who lobbies Congress on behalf of the Sunlight Foundation to bring more transparency to government.
The foundation has begun an effort to get Congress to post bills online, for all to see, 72 hours before lawmakers vote on them.

"It would give the public a chance to really digest and understand what is in the bill," Rosenberg said, "and communicate whether that is a good or a bad thing while there is still time to fix it."

And this of course wouldn't have been addressed by the proposal mentioned in the OP which would require the Baucus bill to be put in final language and posted for some time period before any committee vote. Such a measure would effectively stop the legislative process.

You are again mixing up floor votes in Congress with committee votes that lead to a bill being sent to the floor. (The proposal that was defeated would have prevented all the votes on amendments to the bill that I've been mentioning.)

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

No, it does NOT mean that.

Does so.

"Now let us vote on Pork 1476."

Sorry--you can't have that vote (if the proposed rule change had passed) because you would have had to make a final legalese version of the entire bill (including this proposal) and post it for some time period.

Sorry no vote allowed.

The process stops.

 

[mhaze]

Does so.


Sorry--you can't have that vote (if the proposed rule change had passed) because you would have had to make a final legalese version of the entire bill (including this proposal) and post it for some time period.

Sorry no vote allowed.

The process stops.

Yeah, you mean that process of dumping 1000 page bills on the legislators at midnight and telling them the vote is at 9am?

That process needs to be stopped.

 

[Peephole]

GOP Objects To Putting Health Care Amendments Online

Senate Republicans objected on Monday to a proposal from Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid that all health care reform amendments must first be posted online before being considered in order.

Reid (D-Nev.), crediting Sen. Blanche Lincoln (D-Ark.) for the idea, asked "unanimous consent that no amendment be in order to the Reid substitute amendment number 2786, and the subsequent substitute amendment H.R. 3590, unless the text or internet link to the text of the amendment is posted on the home page of the official Senate website of the member of the Senate who is sponsoring the amendment prior to the amendment being called for consideration by the Senate and that the amendment is filed at the desk. Further, this unanimous consent agreement shall be in effect for the duration of consideration of H.R. 3590."

A member of the erstwhile "Gang of Six" -- the three Republicans and three Democrats from the finance committee who spent months failing to come to agreement on a compromise bill -- Sen. Mike Enzi (R-Wy.) objected to Reid's request.

A message left with Enzi wasn't immediately returned. But on the floor, Enzi said he didn't trust the other party enough to go along. "In light of some of the trust problems and transparency problems we have, while this appears to lead to greater transparency, we can also see ways that this can limit the ability for the minority to offer amendments. And, therefore, I object," he said.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/11/30/gop-objects-to-putting-he_n_374281.html

Oops.

 

[Sporanox]

A member of the erstwhile "Gang of Six" -- the three Republicans and three Democrats from the finance committee who spent months failing to come to agreement on a compromise bill -- Sen. Mike Enzi (R-Wy.) objected to Reid's request.

And from this, HuffPo gets the headline

GOP Objects To Putting Health Care Amendments Online

Dude.

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

At any rate, the Senate healthcare reform bill full text has been posted on-line for around 10 days or so now.

So. . . read it, chump.

(I meant to say that a while back, but forgot to.)

Mhaze, which section of the bill is the secret pork in?

ETA: And I see again that CNN is streaming a live feed of the debate on the Senate floor. That's an awful strange way to run a secret process.

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

And from this, HuffPo gets the headline

CNN is reporting it largely the same way:

However, the process quickly bogged down in Republican procedural objections, causing Reid to lament, "This is not a good way to start this debate."
Republican Sen. Mike Enzi of Wyoming challenged a motion by Reid that he said would unfairly cut off the proposal of amendments, including a planned Republican amendment that would prevent any cuts to the government-run Medicare health program for senior citizens.