I voted for WHAT?


PDA






Farmed Ship
February 19, 2003, 06:35 PM
"I Didn't Realize What All Was in It"

The New York Times has a hilarious story describing how members of Congress are only now discovering, to their dismay, the requirements of the "campaign finance reform" law they voted for last year. "We sometimes leave our audiences in a state of complete shock," says a lawyer who teaches the intricacies of McCain-Feingold to Democratic legislators. The seminars elicit "a sort of slack-jawed amazement at how far this thing reached." A lawyer who runs similar sessions for Republicans says, "There's an initial stage where the reaction is, 'This can't be true.' And then there's the actual anger stage."

A few other snapshots from the story:

The new chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, Representative Robert T. Matsui of California, who voted for McCain-Feingold, says he has been surprised by its fine print.

"I didn't realize what all was in it," Mr. Matsui said. "We have cautioned members: `You have to really understand this law. And if you have any ambiguity, err on the side of caution.' "

***

It turns out that the law also includes a provision requiring that federal candidates appear full-faced for the last four seconds of their campaigns' television advertisements and personally attest that they stand behind the advertisements' content.

Several consultants said this could prove to be quite a problem politically when the time comes to begin televising the kind of hard-hitting negative advertisements that have become standard campaign fare. As a rule, those ads at present tend to reduce the role of the candidate to a small line at the bottom of a screen.

"I think it was a total surprise to people who don't read C.Q. with a yellow pen," said Bill Knapp, a Democratic media consultant, referring to Congressional Quarterly, which keeps close tabs on legislative maneuverings here.

***

Members of both parties have been startled to learn the law's penalties. A violation of McCain-Feingold — be it a national party official's soft-money raising, or a senator's acting as a host at a fund-raiser on behalf of a governor — is a felony carrying a prison sentence of as much as five years.

McCain-Feingold may be an unconstitutional monstrosity, but maybe it will lead members of Congress to reconsider their habit of voting for legislation they haven't read. In any case, it's richly satisfying to see legislators worry that they might be tossed in jail for a seemingly trivial mistake such as speaking at the wrong event or letting your name appear on an invitation. This is the kind of fear and uncertainty their convoluted laws routinely impose on ordinary Americans.

http://www.reason.com/hitandrun/000859.shtml#000859

If you enjoyed reading about "I voted for WHAT?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Thumper
February 19, 2003, 06:58 PM
Nelson voice: "Ha ha."

pax
February 19, 2003, 07:27 PM
Too funny. :D

And it's almost enough to make you feel sorry for the poor schmoes -- these guys voted for something that directly affects their lives and livelihoods, without even reading it??!? Quel idiots!

On second thought, though. Our congresscritters have a lot in common with the average voter. Did you read all the fine print on the initiatives you voted for (or against) last fall?

pax

The best argument against democracy is a five minute conversation with the average voter. -- Winston Churchill

Pendragon
February 19, 2003, 07:31 PM
this is so beautiful - hard to put into words.

if there is going to be pain and misery - especially from mala prohibitum laws, it is poetic that congres gets pinched by them as well.

absolutely beautiful.

PlayTheAces
February 19, 2003, 07:34 PM
Anyone want to hazard a guess how many new bills either have been, or will be, introduced to "modify" it now that our representatives have actually read one of their own laws?

Too funny!

Airwolf
February 19, 2003, 07:54 PM
Finally, members of both parties have been startled to learn the law's penalties. A violation of McCain-Feingold — be it a national party official's soft-money raising, or a senator's acting as a host at a fund-raiser on behalf of a governor — is a felony carrying a prison sentence of as much as five years.

I LOVE IT!!!!!!!!!! :evil:

Payback's a :cuss: isn't it boys and girls!

Now you have a taste of how we feel when we can't put a flash-hider or folding stock on one of our guns unless we want to run the risk of going to federal prison.

MAYBE NEXT TIME YOU'LL READ THE BLOODY THING BEFORE YOU SIGN OFF ON IT!

Don45cal
February 19, 2003, 08:07 PM
It doesn't matter. They will not follow it and then just get a pardon! They are all worthless liars!

twoblink
February 19, 2003, 09:04 PM
Don, are you saying that Senators don't read what they pass, and that all politicians lie?? :scrutiny: No!!

:evil: :neener:

Becareful what you wish for, you might vote for it and have it come true..:D

How do you know politicians are lying? Because they are breathing!!

Standing Wolf
February 19, 2003, 09:46 PM
Leftist extremist chickens come home to roost.

I sincerely hope this abomination will be ruled unconstitutional.

blades67
February 19, 2003, 10:11 PM
I'd like to see some members of Congress sent to jail for violations of the McCain-Feingold campaign finance reform law.:evil:

Pilgrim
February 19, 2003, 10:40 PM
California state legislators are all in a tizzy because they voted for a bill that will allow prison inmates out earlier by allowing them to claim good time, work time credits back to the time they were jailed, not when they arrived in prison.

The legislature thought only minor felons would get out. Well, the new law will also let out drug dealers, car jackers, and people who commit assault with deadly weapons. They are classified as serious offenders and not violent criminals.

The legislators are now begging the governor to veto the bill. Another example of not reading the bills they vote for.

The Republicans whined it is because they are so heavily tasked with solving the $34 billion budget deficit they don't have time to read all the bills. As if they did before the budget crisis.

Monkeyleg
February 19, 2003, 11:08 PM
Truth is that there are so many bills passing through legislatures that the various representatives (state and federal) don't even know what's in them. Usually, their chiefs of staff or lower-ranking staffers sniff out the "bad stuff," but even that's a tough task. A bill that supposedly addresses the number of hours a trucker can drive may contain a provision that restricts the sale of primers.

Representative Blowhard may be a stalwart defender of the 2nd Amendment, only to find his name attached to an anti bill.

It's in the legal offices, where the sausage is made, where the language is crafted, and there's more than a few legalites who want to inject their own politics into a bill.

The problem is the unconscionable number of laws that we pass every year, to satisfy someone, somewhere.

I think this quotation sums it up the best:

"I have little interest in streamlining government or in making it more
efficient, for I mean to reduce its size. I do not undertake to promote
welfare, for I propose to extend freedom. My aim is not to pass laws, but to
repeal them. It is not to inaugurate new programs, but to cancel old ones
that do violence to the Constitution, or that have failed in their purpose,
or that impose on the people an unwarranted financial burden. I will not
attempt to discover whether legislation is 'needed' before I have first
determined whether it is constitutionally permissible. And if I should later
be attacked for neglecting my constituents' interests, I shall reply that I
was informed their main interest is liberty and that in that cause I am
doing the very best I can."

- Barry Goldwater, "The Conscience of a Conservative"

Blackhawk
February 19, 2003, 11:27 PM
Nyuk, nyuk, nyuk.... :D

clem
February 19, 2003, 11:34 PM
Aw, that's too bad.

And everyone of these politicial critters who violates this law should be "drawn & quartered".

Zander
February 20, 2003, 12:12 AM
I'd like to see some members of Congress sent to jail for violations of the McCain-Feingold campaign finance reform law.I'd like to see them put in prison for passing it.

It's clearly unConstitutional...

twoblink
February 20, 2003, 02:55 AM
I've noticed that more sympathy is given to Prairie Dogs in Skunks thread then this one..

Does it mean we love Prairie Dogs more then politicians....??

I guess so!!

I once heard someone say, "Politicians have to look up to see a catfish.." ouch...

As least my gf thinks PD's are cute, nobody thinks that about politicians..

You reap what you sow!

4570Rick
February 20, 2003, 03:10 AM
Prairie dogs serve a higher purpose.:neener:

Dispite breaking the legs of livestock, Prairie dogs at least aerate the soil. :evil:

QKRTHNU
February 20, 2003, 01:08 PM
Sad thing is that they're probably not even thinking about all of the other laws they've passed without reading/understanding.

Shalako
February 20, 2003, 06:04 PM
But don't politicians gauge their productivity and success on the number of new laws they shackle us with? They churn out these laws like s__ through a goose. Well, it looks like they finally slipped in the mess they excreted, and landed face first in the muck that we serfs get to trudge through on a daily basis.

Ha ha!

If you enjoyed reading about "I voted for WHAT?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!