Democrats Push New 2000 Page Bill - Won't Know How It Works Until It Passes

[heyheybooboo]

There is a complete lack of educational youtube videos on the topic!

I mean, what do legislators think - that someone will actually read an entire bill that deals with regulation of complex structured instruments and derivative trading policies? It should be 3 pages long with attached you tube summary, so Joe Plumber can make up an opinion on something waay over his comprehension in 3 seconds and stick with it.

"" It's so simple, even an ATP&N Dumb Ass Political Hack can understand it ""

Not surprisingly the typical FreeMarketeer Clowns have their panties in a bunch. I look forward to the next filibuster attempt in the Senate.

Block & Blame (with a healthy dose of personal attacks and hate) is the Name of the Game.





--

 

[spidey07]

7. Does nothing to address Fannie and Freddie.

After all, according to Frank, they're financially sound.

That is what is so disgusting. The source and cause of all this mess is untouched.

 

[GroundedSailor]

There is a complete lack of educational youtube videos on the topic!

I mean, what do legislators think - that someone will actually read an entire bill that deals with regulation of complex structured instruments and derivative trading policies? It should be 3 pages long with attached you tube summary, so Joe Plumber can make up an opinion on something waay over his comprehension in 3 seconds and stick with it.

3 pages for the Joe Plumbers of this world? You overestimate them.

.

 

[highland145]

Dodd and Frank are the two buttheads in DC who are the most culpable for the financial mess we're in now. Nothing I like more than simpletons who got us in trouble, legislating to get us out of trouble.

Fucking disgusting.

+1

 

[woolfe9999]

There is a complete lack of educational youtube videos on the topic!

I mean, what do legislators think - that someone will actually read an entire bill that deals with regulation of complex structured instruments and derivative trading policies? It should be 3 pages long with attached you tube summary, so Joe Plumber can make up an opinion on something waay over his comprehension in 3 seconds and stick with it.

Indeed. I propose a new benchmark for acceptable legislation. If you can't finish reading a bill during the time of your average bowel movement, the bill must be voted down.

The wingnuts are definitely pioneering a new trend here: making the number of pages of a bill a relevant factor in assessing the bill's merits. Plays great in the current anti-intellectual political climate right now. They're definitely on to something.

- wolf

 

[Bowfinger]

There is a complete lack of educational youtube videos on the topic!

I mean, what do legislators think - that someone will actually read an entire bill that deals with regulation of complex structured instruments and derivative trading policies? It should be 3 pages long with attached you tube summary, so Joe Plumber can make up an opinion on something waay over his comprehension in 3 seconds and stick with it.

Exactly. The usual raging nutters getting worked into a righteous froth on cue. If they'd remove their partisan blinders, they might actually notice Dodd did NOT say they didn't know what's in the bill. He said they don't yet know how it will work, i.e., how effective it will be. They are two very different things.

I'm personally not optimistic. Without having read the bill (of course), I'm betting Finance lobbyists ensured that any real teeth have been stripped. It will hit a few of the most egregious abuses, while ensuring the wealthy and powerful continue to loot America's working class. The Dems will brag about what a great job they've done, the Repubs will be outraged at a long list of the usual imaginary propaganda points, and the sheep on both sides will lap it up and shake their fists at each other while never realizing how they've been played again. In short, SSDD.

But I hope I'm wrong. America has a bleak future until we pull our heads out of our asses.

 

[wetech]

Indeed. I propose a new benchmark for acceptable legislation. If you can't finish reading a bill during the time of your average bowel movement, the bill must be voted down.

The wingnuts are definitely pioneering a new trend here: making the number of pages of a bill a relevant factor in assessing the bill's merits. Plays great in the current anti-intellectual political climate right now. They're definitely on to something.

- wolf

Did you miss these quotes by one of the bill's main authors?

"This is about as important as it gets, because it deals with every single aspect of our lives"

"No one will know until this is actually in place how it works"

This is the problem. They admit that this will impact every person in the country, and in the next breath say they don't know what it does, but we should pass it.

 

[Bowfinger]

Did you miss these quotes by one of the bill's main authors?



This is the problem. They admit that this will impact every person in the country, and in the next breath say they don't know what it does, but we should pass it.

Except that's NOT what they said. That's what the wing-nut propagandists told you they said. Turn off your AM radio and learn to think for yourself.

 

[spidey07]

Also notice the "Never let a good crisis go to waste so you can do things you wouldn't normally be able to do" angle? Dodd flat out said it.

These people think like this. Crisis after crisis is being created or used to pass sweeping control over private industry and every aspect of people's lives.

 

[wetech]

Except that's NOT what they said. That's what the wing-nut propagandists told you they said. Turn off your AM radio and learn to think for yourself.

1) I don't listen to AM radio.
2) Those were direct quotes from Dodd from the WSJ article.

How else can you interpret his second quote? "No one will know until this is actually in place how it works". If you don't know how it works, you shouldn't vote on it.

 

[mav451]

1) I don't listen to AM radio.
2) Those were direct quotes from Dodd from the WSJ article.

How else can you interpret his second quote? "No one will know until this is actually in place how it works". If you don't know how it works, you shouldn't vote on it.

Yeah I would call that a gaffe by Dodd. Obviously nobody can predict the future, but yeah terrible word choice by a politician, who of all things, should understand that perception is paramount in your words.

 

[nonlnear]

How else can you interpret his second quote? "No one will know until this is actually in place how it works". If you don't know how it works, you shouldn't vote on it.

It could mean that nobody can predict the full range of systemic effects that this legislation will have on the ecosystem of financial institutions until it is put into practice. It doesn't have to mean that "nobody understands the bill".

 

[halik]

It could mean that nobody can predict the full range of systemic effects that this legislation will have on the ecosystem of financial institutions until it is put into practice. It doesn't have to mean that "nobody understands the bill".

But it's 2000 pages! That must mean that no one knows what's in it!

These thick bills just magically appear in dc and the congressmen/women just push donkey or elephant buttons attached to their seats.


I think wolfe is dead on with the ignorant rage / anti- intellectualism wave - obviously if 2000 pages of legislature, written by con. lawyers is beyond grasp of Joe Plumber, no one in Washington knows what's in it.

 

[Bowfinger]

1) I don't listen to AM radio.
2) Those were direct quotes from Dodd from the WSJ article.

How else can you interpret his second quote? "No one will know until this is actually in place how it works". If you don't know how it works, you shouldn't vote on it.

As I already said:

"He said they don't yet know how it will work, i.e., how effective it will be. They are two very different things."

 

[Patranus]

But it's 2000 pages! That must mean that no one knows what's in it!

These thick bills just magically appear in dc and the congressmen/women just push donkey or elephant buttons attached to their seats.


I think wolfe is dead on with the ignorant rage / anti- intellectualism wave - obviously if 2000 pages of legislature, written by con. lawyers is beyond grasp of Joe Plumber, no one in Washington knows what's in it.

The problem is the 2000 page bills stuff with other crap no ones knows about because they don't read it. I don't care who writes it.

 

[nonlnear]

But it's 2000 pages! That must mean that no one knows what's in it!

To be fair, it is entirely possible that no one person has bothered to dig into the details of every piece of it.

These thick bills just magically appear in dc and the congressmen/women just push donkey or elephant buttons attached to their seats.

I don't know if you are being sarcastic or not, but I'm not sure it makes a difference! This may occasionally be the case, but I suspect it is far less often than some alarmists claim. The problem with the current lack of metadata about legislative process is nobody ever knows the difference. This is a problem which would be very easy to fix by some tweaks to Congressional rules. I get why source tracking didn't exist in the 1700s, but today there should be absolutely no problem with tracking every word in every bill, and entering it into the Congressional archives as a matter of routine procedure. The software these things are crafted with probably already source every word, but then they toss that data in the trash when they take it to the floor.

I think wolfe is dead on with the ignorant rage / anti- intellectualism wave - obviously if 2000 pages of legislature, written by con. lawyers is beyond grasp of Joe Plumber, no one in Washington knows what's in it.

It's sometimes embarrassing when my objections sound similar to those of anti-intellectuals. I dislike most long bills, but not because they are somehow incomprehensible. (War and Peace is no less comprehensible than Goodnight Moon. It just requires more maturity and knowledge to make sense of it.) Without getting into why I generally dislike them, I should also say that I understand a few of the many reasons why legislation is done the way it is and I detest every single one of these reasons. I also understand that the system is unlikely to change in my lifetime.

 

[Bowfinger]

Also notice the "Never let a good crisis go to waste so you can do things you wouldn't normally be able to do" angle? Dodd flat out said it.

These people think like this. Crisis after crisis is being created or used to pass sweeping control over private industry and every aspect of people's lives.

No sweetie, what he's saying is it takes a crisis to prod our elected "representatives" to rise above their normal special interest whoring and actually serve the public interest for a change. Granted they don't rise very far, but it's at least slightly better than their usual routine corruption.

 

[Throckmorton]

You don't know how ANY bill will work out until it passes. Not even Ronald Reagan can reverse the principles of causality.

BTW, how's Bush's war working out?

 

[Bowfinger]

The problem is the 2000 page bills stuff with other crap no ones knows about because they don't read it. I don't care who writes it.

Doing a little back peddling now that your OP has been exposed as your usual inaccurate partisan trolling?

 

[SAWYER]

I'm sure Obama will allow at least 48 hours for the public to know exactly what is in the bill before he signs it

 

[Patranus]

BTW, how's Bush's war working out?

I don't know, why don't you ask Clinton who voted for it?

 

[nonlnear]

I'm sure Obama will allow at least 48 hours for the public to know exactly what is in the bill before he signs it

Oh quiet you, alluding to silly campaign promises with such biting sarcasm like that. Only a partisan hack would insinuate that glaring incongruities between campaign promises and subsequent action constitute "lying".

 

[Throckmorton]

I don't know, why don't you ask Clinton who voted for it?

Because she knew how it was going to work out when she voted for it? See my point??

 

[Jaskalas]

You're doing a heckuva job, free market!

If we actually had one, I might agree with your snide remark. However, given that we've artificially moved $24 trillion dollars in a vain attempt to save the government funded system... forgive me if I do not partake in some illusion that our market is free.

Let me quote the money moved.

• $6.8 trillion from the Federal Reserve

• $2.3 trillion from the FDIC

• $7.4 trillion from Treasury

• $7.2 trillion in other government programs

That adds up to $23.7 trillion dollars.

That's more than the moon shot, the New Deal and World War II combined ... in 2008 dollars. And it's way more than the entire U.S. gross domestic product -- just over $14 trillion.

 

[Patranus]

Someone said something about this being unconstitutional by violating the 4th and 5th amendments.