What DOES John Conyers Do When a Bill Is Too Long and Complex?

By John W. Lillpop

Rep. John Conyers (D-Mich.) made an excellent point recently about the outrageous length and complexity of legislation presented to overwhelmed legislatures.

As reported, in part at Csnnews:


"(CNSNews.com) - During his speech at a National Press Club luncheon, House Judiciary Chairman John Conyers (D-Mich.), questioned the point of lawmakers reading the health care bill.

“I love these members, they get up and say, ‘Read the bill,’” said Conyers.
“What good is reading the bill if it’s a thousand pages and you don’t have two days and two lawyers to find out what it means after you read the bill?”

So, Rep. Conyers, what is a sensible solution?

Should members Vote Yea or Nay based on the political affiliation of the author? In your case, if the bill in question was put together by a Democrat, you don't bother reading the damn thing, but always vote Yea; whereas, for any unwieldy bill originating with a Republican, an automatic Nay vote is the responsible thing to do?

President Obama would surely be disappointed to learn of such practices in this post-partisan era., brought about by his election to the presidency.

On the other hand, the president does not read the God-awful things either and will sign damn near anything costing at least one trillion dollars and intended to make life easier for Jihadists and racial minorities, PROVIDED said bill was crafted by a Democrat!

Alternatively, Congress could hire 1,072 ACLU attorneys to stand by in readiness to provide consultation to the president and Congress on every bill exceeding 1,000 pages. That would be two attorneys for the president and two for each member of Congress.

This procedural enhancement would fit right in because the annual cost would be about one trillion dollars, a number that seems to resonate well with Obama and ding bat liberals!

The only other option would be for a group of reasonable Congress critters to enforce a blockade against long and unwieldy legislation by refusing to vote one way or the other on such bills.

Even that is problematic, though, because there are not enough "reasonable" Congress critters around to make a difference!