An Open Reply to Help Senator Durbin Better Understand the 'Read the Bills Act'

I recently used the DownsizeDC.org website to contact my representative and the senators from Illinois and tell them I support the "Read the Bills Act" and that I want them to vote for it. Senator Dick Durbin (well, probably not him personally but his staff) actually took the time to shoot me an email. This is very kind of his office to do, for it at least acknowledges me as a human individual and lets me know that they did take the time to read over my concerns, which is more than either my representative or Senator Obama did. Of course, Senator Obama can be forgiven because he is probably busy campaigning for president right now and probably doesn't have time for the concerns of his constituents here in Illinois. Anyway, after reading the response from Senator Durbin's office, it occurred to me that
"Thank you for your message about knowing the full contents of legislation considered by Congress."

Well, I'm not sure that you have to "know the full contents" of the legislation, but I suppose that's a good interpretation. Really, we just want you to read the bills.

"My staff and I try very hard to look at every bill that comes to the Senate floor. Provisions sometimes are carefully worded to appear innocuous and their import only becomes clear later. Other times, we catch something at the last minute but the will of the Senate as a whole is to move the measure forward and our only option is to try to overturn the provision in another forum."

Exactly. This again is why you should pass the "Read the Bills Act." Oh, and by the way, there's another bill introduced by Downsize DC called the "One Subject at a Time Act." That bill seem pretty good at passing bad, unconstitutional legislation and then avoiding accountability and blaming others for the problems you all create, but you don't seem to have the ability to stand up and do something about these procedural inequities. Well, this is your opportunity to actually do something about the complaints you have, something positive and principled.

"I will keep your concerns in mind as I continue to work for transparence in government. Thank you again for contacting me. Please feel free to keep in touch.

Sincerely,
Richard J. Durbin
United States Senator
RJD/ec"

You're very welcome. I will be sure to keep contacting you as long as I feel you are still avoiding these simple, common sense measures that should be made into laws.

"P.S. If you are ever visiting Washington, please feel free to join Senator Obama and me at our weekly constituent coffee. When the Senate is in session, we provide coffee and donuts every Thursday at 8:30 a.m. as we hear what is on the minds of Illinoisans and respond to your questions. We would welcome your participation. Please call my D.C. office for more details."

After reading your letter I am left with some questions. Do you support the "Read the Bills Act" or do you not? You never seemed to answer that question. Perhaps I am wrong, but judging by the tone of your letter and the excuses you put forward as to why bills don't get read, I would assume that you are not in favor of the "Read the Bills Act" and you are instead in favor of less powerful provisions in Senate rules. This attitude confounds me. I must wonder why any thinking, principled supposed to represent. Whatever the reason, Mr. Durbin, if you do not support the "Read the Bills Act" I urge you to reconsider. As time goes by, more and more people are going to find out about this and other common sense bills that will help the people take back control of their government. When this happens, it would certainly look good if you were perceived as a champion of such a bill, rather than a detractor.

Article Source: http://www.everyonesarticles.com

Did you find this article useful? For more useful tips and hints, points to ponder and keep in mind, techniques, and insights pertaining to credit card, do please browse for more information at our websites. www.yoursgoogleincome.com www.freeearningtip.com

Please Rate this Article

5 out of 54 out of 53 out of 52 out of 51 out of 5 

Not yet Rated