Congress Now Not Even Bothering to Name the Bills They Pass

Congress Now Not Even Bothering to Name the Bills They Pass

Warner Todd Huston
Gateway Pundit
Monday, August 9, 2010

Thanks to CATO’s Jim Harper, we discover that the slovenly work of Obama’s Congress is so bad that they are now passing bills that they haven’t even bothered to name. It’s been bad enough that the Democrats have affixed to bills names that are entirely Orwellian in nature, but now they aren’t even bothering to think that hard.

In the recent past we’ve gotten bills named in ways that convey the precise opposite nature of what the bill does. We’ve had the “Employee Free Choice Act” that actually takes away worker’s choice, we’ve had the “Uniting American Families Act” that doesn’t unite American families but unites families of illegal immigrants, and we’ve had the “Freedom of Choice Act” which takes away the freedom of a fetus to chose life, apparently.

But as Harper informs us we’ve finally gotten to the nub of the matter. The Democrats are tired of sinking all their brain power into thinking up bill names that hide their true intent. It’s just so taxing on these busy, busy congressmen, ya know? Now they have gotten so lazy that they aren’t naming the bills at all.

Apparently Pelosi’s lazy House of Representatives has just passed H.R. 1586 which is proudly titled the “XXXXXX Act of XXXX.”

What? Here’s how Harper explains this foolishness…

The Senate’s substitute amendment on this $26 billion spending bill had a placeholder bill name, and it could not take time to replace the placeholder. The House is expected to return this week and pass the Senate amendment, sending it to the president.

And since the Senate is now out of session, and because both houses have to pass bills sporting the same name, the bill will not legally be re-named from this placeholder title and will have to go into law as the “XXXXXX Act of XXXX.”

As Harper says, “the ‘law with no name’ will stand as a lasting tribute to the inattention Congress gives its work. Spending billions of taxpayer dollars is a hurried and casual affair for our lawmakers.”

Indeed.

I say that instead of six X’s in the title, they should have stuck with just three because this whole thing is obscene.

Lots of credibility in that article, especially considering the source.

What's it matter what the bills are named anyways?

BubbleBliss wrote:Lots of credibility in that article, especially considering the source.

What? Just because you don't like the source?

http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/111_HR_1586.html

http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/2010/08/09/what-do-prince-and-h-r-1586-have-in-common/

http://blog.heritage.org/2010/08/09/the-bill-with-no-name-2/

http://topconservativeblogs.com/2010/08/09/congress-now-not-even-bothering-to-name-the-bills-they-pass/

http://apps.detnews.com/apps/blogs/watercooler/index.php

http://www.washingtonwatch.com/blog/2010/08/08/senate-passes-the-______act-of____-no-foolin/

http://sweetness-light.com/archive/congress-to-pass-the-______act-of____

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/congress-competence-attention-detail-strike-again

http://www.resistnet.com/forum/topics/congress-now-not-even

http://sayanythingblog.com/entry/if-congress-doesnt-have-time-to-name-the-bills-do-you-think-theyve-bothered-to-read-them/

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-20012998-38.html

http://politifi.com/news/Congress-Now-Not-Even-Bothering-to-Name-Bills-1197338.html

Now, if i were to read something on a left wing site and they had proof of their allegations, i wouldn't sit there and say, "Lots of credibility in that article, especially considering the source." That's a cop out, first class.

BubbleBliss wrote:What's it matter what the bills are named anyways?

I'm not even going to answer a question like that.

No, because a source like that isn't really credible, is it? I don't post from left-wing websites, I post from credible news outlets. Not saying that the article isn't true, I'm just saying that there could be another side to the story that this website conveniantly choses to leave out. I don't trust websites like moveon.org.

Cnet isn't even a political site. They put up the story.

Yup, and unlike the article that you posted it doesn't say that Congress doesn't bother to name bills anymore but stresses that this was an exception and that there is a possibility to go back and name the bill but that it would delay the bill going into effect for another 6 weeks.
Your article makes it sound like this is an everyday thing now and that that Congress is doing this on a regular basis, when it's clear that this bill was passed like this because it contained crucial benefits to American citizens. Would you rather pass an unnamed bill that helps out citizens now or wait to name the bill and pass it in 6 weeks?

BubbleBliss wrote:
Yup, and unlike the article that you posted it doesn't say that Congress doesn't bother to name bills anymore but stresses that this was an exception and that there is a possibility to go back and name the bill but that it would delay the bill going into effect for another 6 weeks.
Your article makes it sound like this is an everyday thing now and that that Congress is doing this on a regular basis, when it's clear that this bill was passed like this because it contained crucial benefits to American citizens. Would you rather pass an unnamed bill that helps out citizens now or wait to name the bill and pass it in 6 weeks?

It never said that this was the practice of congress. It said that now they're not even naming bills. You keep splitting hairs because you can't come up with a good enough defense for your pals up there you're so enamored over.

If you're going to pass a bill, you name it. In your world, no, may, or when we get "time" to do it.

Calm it down Tex. I think he has a valid point.

The_Amber_Spyglass wrote:Calm it down Tex. I think he has a valid point.

Really? We've never had a congress that passed legislation without naming it. Ever. But hey, who would want to name a bill when it’s a $26 billion bailout for state gov'ts, funded in part by $11 billion in tax hikes on US companies that compete internationally? No wonder business is sitting on money here instead of spending to expand and hire. Plus, this piles on top of the $862 billion failed stimulus bill and a long list of massive deficit spending.

Elections here have consequences. November, man, November.

No, sorry my fault. I should have quoted the relevant bit. I meant the valid point about media titles being misleading as to the content.

You know I feel the same way about some of your sources.

TexasBlue wrote:

BubbleBliss wrote:
Yup, and unlike the article that you posted it doesn't say that Congress doesn't bother to name bills anymore but stresses that this was an exception and that there is a possibility to go back and name the bill but that it would delay the bill going into effect for another 6 weeks.
Your article makes it sound like this is an everyday thing now and that that Congress is doing this on a regular basis, when it's clear that this bill was passed like this because it contained crucial benefits to American citizens. Would you rather pass an unnamed bill that helps out citizens now or wait to name the bill and pass it in 6 weeks?

It never said that this was the practice of congress. It said that now they're not even naming bills. You keep splitting hairs because you can't come up with a good enough defense for your pals up there you're so enamored over.

If you're going to pass a bill, you name it. In your world, no, may, or when we get "time" to do it.

I'm saying that the title is misleading and hints towards something that is not true. Opinion articles like this tend to do that, which is why I don't trust them no matter where they come from. Of course when asked about it, the writer can always say "Well that's now how I meant it" but that doesn't change how most people interpret it.

I'm not saying that we shouldn't name bills anymore, but what can 1 unnamed bill do? It'll just be known as the "Unnamed Bill" instead of something like "The American Reinvestment Act". Both titles will always stick out. However, I don't think this should become common practice, as I'm sure it won't be.