Tuesday, October 27, 2009

A "READ the BILL" BILL - without it, maybe unconstitutional !???

In the Investor’s Business Daily paper last Friday, (July 2009) - there was an article ---
Congress Needs A Read-The-Bill Bill


    WHERE DO YOU STAND ON THE PROBLEM OF MASSIVE BILLS BEING PASSED, SOME WITH AMENDMENTS ADDED AND NOT VOTED ON, AND SENT TO THE PRESIDENT FOR SIGNING? Wouldn’t any amendment not voted on make the BILL invalid since it was not voted on properly?? Wouldn’t that also make that BILL, if SIGNED by the President, either NULL and VOID since there is no “line item veto”, or UN-CONSTITUTIONAL in its entirety?

FOR ALL BILLS REGARDLESS OF VALID SECTIONS, WHY NOT INSIST THAT ANY BILL SHALL NOT HAVE ANY AMENDMENT THAT DOES NOT DIRECTLY PERTAIN TO THE MAIN SUBJECT?   BY THAT, I MEAN A DISASTER BILL CAN’T HAVE FUNDING FOR A LOCAL POOL, OR STATUE CONSERVATION, OR ANY OTHER NON-RELATED ITEM?   Don’t you think that would STOP much of the “PORK PADDING” that is going on in Congress?

Do you support another “STIMULUS PACKAGE”?
If yes -- WHY? They have spent very little of the Obama package.
AND - much of the BUSH package went out the door before you were sworn in. But it clearly has not solved much, and MANY of the SAME PEOPLE that caused the crash are still walking the streets. LAWS WERE BROKEN for so much money to be taken or lost, including people in the SEC. Are you doing anything to push for their being found and jailed??

[[[ 10/27/09 -- I don't remember how much of the above are MY comments, and how much was in the original article, so I won't lay any claims beyond saying that I think everything below the BOLD IS mine because I support it and it seems to be in my writing style. I think this was to be a letter to my "representatives", but not finished.

So HEY to 'them' - take note. ]]]

No comments:

Post a Comment