Mandatory Minimum Amount of Time prior to voting on a bill?

[ShawnD1]

I don't think it's important who writes the summaries. For that matter, I wouldn't trust the summaries .

How high quality are the staffers? If they're paid as little as possible and they don't give a shit about their job, the summaries would be lazy as hell. What does the Fuck Internet Pedophiles Act say? Uh... it says fuck pedophiles! (it would actually say some stuff about abolishing the fourth amendment, allowing police to do random searches on people)

 

[werepossum]

How high quality are the staffers? If they're paid as little as possible and they don't give a shit about their job, the summaries would be lazy as hell. What does the Fuck Internet Pedophiles Act say? Uh... it says fuck pedophiles! (it would actually say some stuff about abolishing the fourth amendment, allowing police to do random searches on people)

I think in a lot of cases, the staffers are brighter than the Congresscritters, but admittedly the quality varies. Under Reagan I was about to build a computer when memory suddenly went through the roof. Being told it was due to a 100% government tariff, I contacted my Representative and both Senators. Representative Marilyn Lloyd's staffers were nice but utterly useless, unable to even work their own phone system much less shed any light on the subject. Senator Gore's staffers just blew me off; if they didn't know me, they had no interest in talking to me and directed me to call my Representative. (Senators and their staffs are for important people with big checks.) Senator Sasser's staffers were incredibly effective, informed and capable; the first staffer I contacted not only was familiar with the issue and why the action (by the executive branch no less) had been taken, but immediately transferred me to D.C. to speak with the staffer in charge of that particular issue.

So obviously the quality of staffers would vary considerably. But so does the quality of Congresscritters. Patty Murray for instance has the apparent intellect of pocket lint and she's a Senator. I suspect that assuming a legal requirement for the Congresscritter to personally write summaries, of the three I experienced Representative Marilyn Lloyd's summaries would have been written by Ms. Lloyd based on a friendly lobbyist's summary, Senator Gore's summary would have been written to make Senator Gore look Presidential by a staffer whose entire responsibility was to make Senator Gore look Presidential, and Senator Sasser would have written his mostly based on the thorough summary of a staffer - to the detriment of whatever else Senator Sasser would have otherwise been doing.

I should in fairness point out that all three were Democrats (as was I at the time) and that Representative Lloyd, while not exactly a beacon of shining intelligence and leadership (she ran for and won her husband's seat after his untimely death) and unable or unwilling to set up a competent staff, was actually a pretty good Congresswoman. She spent her time not trying to fight any great social battles or change the tax code or the scope of government, but actually helping constituents cope with government (e.g. why hasn't my Social Security checks started, why does the IRS say I haven't paid my taxes) and looking out for her constituents' interests such as keeping milk prices artificially high for dairy farmers (we had a glut of milk at the time and low prices could have driven out many small dairy farmers - and Southeast Tennessee has only small dairy farms.) A Representative can be narrowly focused on her constituents and still be a good Representative.

 

[Agent11]

You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it drink.

 

[Matt1970]

They would have had to debate Obamacare for 52 days straight or 156 8 hour sessions.

 

[BigBarney]

They would have had to debate Obamacare for 52 days straight or 156 8 hour sessions.

not true. they would have had 52 days to read AND debate Obamacare.