Showing posts with label one subject at a time. Show all posts
Showing posts with label one subject at a time. Show all posts

Saturday, March 06, 2010

Under the cover of darkness

The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has the responsibility to police the business world (in the name of "Protecting America's Consumers"). They have a great deal of power to regulate corporations. And their power to enforce of these regulations is even greater. At the very least, they can just drag the process out to the point of enormous expense and loss of business.


With such power, in our government, there are supposed to be checks and balances. Congress should have bipartisan discussions about the power the FTC and all sub-organization agencies have and specifically those in positions of power in those agencies. Instead, what often happens is wholesale bypassing of discussion/debate.




These appointments (and who knows how many others) get tossed in at the end of the day (~8pm) with about a dozen people in the room, many of which are probably clerks and staffers (see video - slider time; ~625:30).  No discussion of qualifications, biases, philosophy; just basically "Approve them all."

Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to consider Executive Calendar Nos. 603, 604, 610, 625, 629, 630, and 700 so that the nominees be confirmed en bloc, the motions to reconsider be laid upon the table en bloc; that no further motions be in order; and that any statements related to the nominations be printed in the Record; that the President be immediately notified of the Senate’s action, and the Senate then resume legislative session.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


This is incredible. Now I'm not Congressional parliamentary procedure expert, so I may be reading this all wrong, but it seems that just  saying, "I'd like to pass this as long as nobody objects." when nobody else is in the room doesn't smack of a republic (or even a democracy). 




If you look at the description of the Senate Executive Calendar, you'll see that it does contain nominations: 


Nominations
This section identifies Presidential Nominations submitted to the Senate for confirmation, placed on the Executive Calendar with a sequentially assigned calendar number and ready for Senate floor consideration.

But that description doesn't seem to imply that they can just bypass consideration. So I take this to mean that these nominations are supposed to considered by both parties on the floor.  Apparently not.


Here's how I read these statements individually:
I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to consider Executive Calendar Nos. 603, 604, 610, 625, 629, 630, and 700 
Ok, nothing major here. It seems this is just wanting to elevate these particular items to the floor for consideration [tomorrow?].  Then they will discuss each of them individually, right? 
so that the nominees be confirmed en bloc
Oh.  Well, at least they can't be confirmed with the Republican motions to reconsider (objections) blocking them.
the motions to reconsider be laid upon the table en bloc
huh? All of them?  Just like that? Well, as long as the the Republicans can resubmit their motions before confirmation...
that no further motions be in order
Wait, what? Now Republicans CAN'T submit motions to reconsider?
and that any statements related to the nominations be printed in the Record; that the President be immediately notified of the Senate’s action, 
Read: "Appropriate paperwork be done"
and the Senate then resume legislative session. 
"Just move along. Nothing to see here." Well surely nobody would allow this to just go by unchallenged.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Oh come on! 


I'm not only getting on the Democrats, I'm sure Republicans did the same blasted thing during their tenure. But that doesn't excuse the practice of what appears to be rubber stamp approving all the weasels while the farmer is asleep.


Almost makes one wonder if someone could just slip in there real quick right before adjourning when there are like 2 clerks and a transcriptionist and say, "I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to consider Executive Calendar number 777 to direct all tax dollars to this offshore account; that a small island be granted to me; that all motions in objection be tabled; that no further motions be in order; that take-backs aren't allowed; that I'm rubber and you're glue; that no paperwork be filed on this in the Record; that the President be immediately notified of my retirement; and the Senate then resume legislative session."


Without objection, it is so ordered.

Monday, October 05, 2009

You all know I'm ... how shall I put it, "politically minded" at times.  Well, I'm also against signing up for web newsletters. Most seem to either ...
  • constantly throw ads at me, 
  • send enormous articles at me 4-5 times a day, 
  • simply say nothing but teases of information, 
  • require me to click on a link to get any real information, or
  • all of the above.  
However, I'm a member of a web organization called DownsizeDC.org whose newsletter does none of these things. I hope you'll be interested in what they are proposing as I am. 

I'm asking you to look into this because I'd like your help in compelling Congress to pass two specific pieces of legislation created by DownsizeDC.org:

The Read the Bills Act [http://www.downsizedc.org/etp/campaigns/27]
The One Subject at a Time Act [http://www.downsizedc.org/etp/campaigns/83]

These bills would do exactly what their names suggest . . .

The Read the Bills Act would require that every bill be posted online for 7 days, and more importantly, would require that every member of Congress read every word of every law (enforced by requiring them to sign affidavit) they want to impose on you, BEFORE they vote to enact it.

Congress is routinely ignorant of the laws they pass, but ignorance of the law is no excuse for us, and it shouldn't be allowed for Congress either.

Even when they do know the content of the bills before them, they pass unpopular laws by stuffing them as portion of a larger, more popular one. Would it surprise you to know that the Minimum Wage Increase in 2007 was put in as subsection of an Iraq war spending bill?  Or how about that the REAL ID Act, which requires a national ID card, was passed as a small amendment to the "Emergency, Supplemental Appropriations Act for Defense, the Global War on Terror, and Tsunami Relief?"

The One Subject at a Time Act would prohibit Congress from passing unpopular laws by combining them with popular but unrelated proposals. Every law would have to be voted on as a stand alone measure, and pass or fail on its own merits.

They require no membership fee and though I have donated no money to them yet, I am considering doing so. Their newsletter is also a great source of short (most are shorter than this email), but compelling and informative nuggets. You can sign up for it for free, without a membership by going here: http://www.downsizedc.org/page/newsletter and entering your email address.

Should you chose, you can sign up for a free membership with DownsizeDC.org which will . . .
  • Allow you to promote these bills by sending letters to Congress -- all it takes is a few mouse-clicks and keyboard strokes
  • This can be done in one step and is much easier with Downsize DC than by visiting each Congressional website and posting separately
  • Keep you posted on what Congress is doing through an excellent email newsletter, the Downsizer-Dispatch
  • Enable you to pressure Congress on other issues
  • Make your pressure on Congress more effective by combining it with the efforts of thousands of others
You may not agree with all the stands Downsize DC takes, but unlike a political party or candidate, you can choose which Downsize DC campaigns you want to support.

I hope you'll join me in promoting the Read the Bills Act and the One Subject at a Time Act.

If you do decide to join me in this effort please drop me a line and let me know. 

Thanks for considering this,

RR