Bless you for trying to simplify things! Of course, it’s in the obfuscation that they manage to hide the things that they don’t want other legislators or the public to see!
-
-
-
You are not a constituent... you dont even live in Michigan
-
I am a constituent ...let me agree with him. I want it simplified. Why is this bad? I agree not being a constituent is important in some instances but this is something we can all get behind if we value the truth.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Having worked on various Virginia open gov projects it’s amazing the similarities between software code and legal code development. A lot of best practices from version control would dramaticallly improve legal statutes.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Searchable? Absolutely. Readable? No thanks. Legal documents aren't tweets they will love complex and nuanced and intricate that's unavoidably. Forced simplicity will bring ambiguity which will bring the judicial or executive performing the role of Congress.
-
It would be nice if the legislators who are voting on the law actually read it.
-
They don't need to tbh they have staff for a reason. Non legal people can serve in Congress and are important to representing people but they won't understand every bill so we need specialists.
-
The Constitution was written to be easily read and understood. Laws should be easily read and understood. Regulation can get in the weeds of a specific subject and should be handled by and with contributions from subject matter experts. Don't let politicians hide in omnibills
-
Disagree. The bedrock of our legal system isn't written the same way as the laws of our system for a reason. There's a difference between the broad and the specific.
-
Then perhaps bills should become more specific so language cannot hide from us in them and be used to pass funding or law in and end run around others. Politely disagree with
@bryce_carmony -
What's the disagreement? laws should be specific which requires technical writing. What kind of specificity do you want?
-
No omnibus bills. One issue, one bill that stays within that issue. A bill that addresses an issue shouldn’t go off into the weeds for something completely different. Bills should be targeted, and not overreaching.
- 14 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
It’s a shame there has to be legislation for this to be done, and that it’s not just done because it should be.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
An honest question - if we need to pass a law to make Congress read and draft smaller bills...is this even a legitimate government that can claim to be restrained by the Constitution?
-
Do you live in the 3rd district?
-
Then I suggest chatting with YOUR Congressmember about these Great Ideas..
-
Are you intending to come off as adversarial? If not, why not be happy others are positive about this and encourage calling their representative to support Justin’s bill? If you are, what is the issue?
-
LMAO! Republican Leadership couldnt care less about Amash or his bill. Wonderful window dressing, though.
-
You didn’t answer my question in the least.
-
The bill will go nowhere. Amash has no influence with the leadership - ZERO influence. Just forget about it.
- 9 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.