« What Would Jesus Do? | Main | "Tolerance of the intolerant is not a virtue. It is suicide." »

Next time, Pat, try reading the bill

Sen. Pat Lehahy is concerned that the new "financial reform" bill exempts the SEC from Freedom of Information Act requests:

... I am concerned that an overly broad Freedom of Information Act exemption, originally drafted in the House of Representatives and which was included in the final law, is contrary to the very important goals of the Wall Street Reform bill - restoring accountability and transparency to our financial markets. The SEC should immediately issue guidance narrowly interpreting this FOIA exemption in a manner that is both consistent with the President's policy of government transparency and with Congressional intent. I will work with the Obama administration and others in Congress to ensure that the SEC remains subject to FOIA and accountable to the American people.

Um ... Pat? The time to voice concerns like these is BEFORE you vote to pass the bill.

And the establishment wonders why Tea Partiers are "angry" ...


TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
/cgi-bin/mt-tb.cgi/39775.

Comments (28)

"The SEC should immediat... (Below threshold)
Oyster:

"The SEC should immediately issue guidance narrowly interpreting this FOIA exemption in a manner that is both consistent with the President's policy of government transparency and with Congressional intent."

They already stall, ignore and whine about FOIA requests. Now they have an excuse. Great job there, Oh Mighty Congress who can do anything you want.

Do you get the feeling the ... (Below threshold)
JAT0:

Do you get the feeling the members of Congress really cannot read?

After 200 plus years, does this country really need more laws? Seems that Congress just makes up "stuff" just to kep their jobs.

Interesting that no Republi... (Below threshold)
Frankly B:

Interesting that no Republicans raised a flag over this during delibertions over the bill.

Guess they didn't read it either.

No wonder Tea partiers are angry. Turns out Republicans are not better than Democrats after all.

Grrr!

What a dumb f*ck. You know ... (Below threshold)
John S:

What a dumb f*ck. You know what would be fun? Let's pass a law where we go through the entire 80,000 page Federal Register and delete every instance of the words "Congress is exempt." This would make members of Congress subject to every annoying Federal regulation. And let us set up 500 special prosecutors who do nothing but investigate and harass members of Congress to make sure they follow every Federal law. Then I bet they'd read the goddamn bills before they vote on them.

As the time between when a ... (Below threshold)
JSchuler:

As the time between when a bill becomes available and when a bill is voted on has narrowed, and as bills are intentionally written to be as opaque as possible so a casual read won't reveal any details, it's not surprising that not even Republicans read the bill: it was designed to not be read.

That doesn't mean Republicans are no better than Democrats. Voting against something which you have not been allowed the time to read and properly digest is a principled position.

Thank you JSchuler you took... (Below threshold)

Thank you JSchuler you took the words right out of my mouth. To bash the Republicans for not finding this piece of crap in a bill they didn't vote FOR is absurd.

Lehahy VOTED FOR THE BILL! This idiot voted for something he hadn't read and NOW he is whining about it.

This is why Americans are pissed off!

Guess they didn't read i... (Below threshold)
cirby:

Guess they didn't read it either.

They were busy enough telling you about the REALLY bad parts of the bill that they never got around to mentioning this bit, or didn't notice just how stupid this part was. It's "only" 2300 pages, after all...

This is why legislation shouldn't be longer than a Harry Potter book - it's too easy to hide really, really bad things that only get found after the final version gets voted on.

"Voting against somethin... (Below threshold)
Frankly B:

"Voting against something which you have not been allowed the time to read and properly digest is a principled position."

They didn't read it either, and if there was time for Democrats to read it there was time for Republicans to read it too. They obviously didn't or if they did they didn't care about this provision.

Don't make excuses for them. Voting against something you haven't read is as bonehead stupid as voting for something. These clowns are paid to know what the bill contains, Republicans and Democrats. They had MONTHS to read the bill.

Frankly B, I'm willing to a... (Below threshold)
Upset Old Guy:

Frankly B, I'm willing to accept your assertion that Republicans had MONTHS to read this bill with your citations.

Questions you need to answer that come readily to mind are - When was the final bill version of the bill made available to the members of Congress? In which version of the bill did this provision become included? Were there revisions to his provision in subsequent versions of the bill? What were those publishing dates?

Get back to us on this please.

All I'm saying is that if d... (Below threshold)
Frankly B:

All I'm saying is that if democrats had time to read this bill and understand the Freedom of Misinformation implications so did the Republicans. That's reason enough to be angry too. The "principled" position recognizes that simple equation.

On the other hand, Frankly ... (Below threshold)
alanstorm:

On the other hand, Frankly B, if you've read through a fraction of the bill and already found enough reasons to vote against it, why would you necessarily read any further? Not saying that's what happened, but it's a possibility.

In that case, the only reason to keep slogging through the used food is to find additional ammunition to use against it, and that may or may not be a good use of the reader's time. I certainly don't finish reading bad books just to get to the end.

So, you're calling me unpri... (Below threshold)
Upset Old Guy:

So, you're calling me unprincipled? Now that's no way to build a mutually respectful relationship. You disappoint me.

As to reading, that depends on when the finished bill became available. Not when the House bill was voted on, or the Senate bill. The finished bill. And specifically, if Republicans frozen out of the reconciliation process.

Without such information you're just making assertions on that MONTHS statement.

Your not paid to read bad b... (Below threshold)
Frank B:

Your not paid to read bad books, Alan. Congress members are paid to read bad laws and good laws.

Your suggesting that Republicans voted against the bill not knowing what it contained.

I"m sure Nancy believes it ... (Below threshold)
GarandFan:

I"m sure Nancy believes it had to be passed, so that we'd find out what was in it.

"I will ... (Below threshold)
914:


"I will work with the Obama administration and others in Congress to ensure that the SEC remains subject to FOIA and accountable to the American people."


You pathetic fool's will be held accountable in November jacass.

These are the same... (Below threshold)
macofromoc:

These are the same people that want to negotiate with Iran?? We're in the best of hands.

You're right Frank. Not a d... (Below threshold)
ODA315:

You're right Frank. Not a dimes worth of difference between the parties. Now go away.

Hey Frank, here's a clue x ... (Below threshold)
Gmac:

Hey Frank, here's a clue x 4 upside your head.

The people that WROTE the bill were ALL Democrats.
The people that REVISED the bill were ALL Democrats.

Placing blame on ANYONE else for them passing is BS too.
Democrats were the ONLY ones that voted for them.

Please go back to your corner, sit down and shut up before you type out any more asinine assertions again making you look any stupider than you really are.

Frank/Frankly B, should I r... (Below threshold)
alanstorm:

Frank/Frankly B, should I refer to you as Dr. Pangloss instead?

Yes, in an ideal world, congressfolk would read every word of every bill. However, the socialists have been setting many minefield in the the recent past, and time and resources are limited. Once you have a clear path, you don't need to explode every mine.

I don't care if they read the entire bill if they vote against it. If they want to vote FOR a bill, they had better damn well have the entire thing memorized.

Get the difference?

Apparently not one single R... (Below threshold)
Frankly B:

Apparently not one single Republican or Democrat read the entire bill, Alan. Or if they did read it no one objected to this section.

Either they didn't read it, or they read it and didn't see a problem with this part of the bill.

Apparently not one... (Below threshold)
JSchuler:
Apparently not one single Republican or Democrat read the entire bill, Alan.

Wait, weren't you bashing Republicans for not having read a bill that the Democrats had time enough to read? So, if you now admit that Democrats haven't read the bill, where does your evidence come from, and thus complaint, that Republicans had enough time to do due diligence?

It's a concern troll, folks... (Below threshold)
Les Nessman:

It's a concern troll, folks. Nothing more.

JSchuler - see #10.<p... (Below threshold)
Frankly B:

JSchuler - see #10.

If you fault a Democrat for not reading the bill and noticing the SEC FOIA clause then you have to fault Republicans for doing the same thing.

Unless you're a right wing, hypocritical ideologue who finds fault with everyone but "their own."

or feel free to show where Republicans weren't allowed adequate time to read the bill, or some other lame excuse. Got a link? No? Hmm...

"Frankly B",Which Re... (Below threshold)
SCSIwuzzy:

"Frankly B",
Which Republicans voted for this bill?

"Which Republicans voted... (Below threshold)
Frankly B:

"Which Republicans voted for this bill?"

Vote for it? Apparently they didn't even bother to read it.

But it passed. The republican representatives didn't even bother to read it, and it'll soon be law.

#25Well I have to ... (Below threshold)
914:

#25

Well I have to admit Frank, you are not scoring any points for making sense.


If you fault a Dem... (Below threshold)
JSChuler:
If you fault a Democrat for not reading the bill and noticing the SEC FOIA clause then you have to fault Republicans for doing the same thing.
I don't fault Democrats for not reading the bill. I fault people who voted for it for not reading the bill. I know it's a tough concept to wrap your head around. You might have to grow a second neuron to understand the difference.

And as it is your accusation, the burden of proof rests with you.

So, Frankly B, you can't na... (Below threshold)
SCSIwuzzy:

So, Frankly B, you can't name the Republican's that voted yes on a bill they didn't read, or read and failed to find an odious flaw.
But when others spot someone that clearly did vote yes, clearly did not read it and clearly found the flaw odious... because he admits all 3, you get your pants in a bunch when people have a problem with that?
Here the answer to my question, however, since you're too interested in bloviating:
Snowe, Collins and Brown. Either they didn't read it or they didn't have a problem with it. Either one is enough to make me call them out on it. Along with the 54 democrats in the same boat.
Fun fact for the partisanship above all folks like your self: Only one democrat in the senate opposes the bill. It wasn't punitive enough for his tastes...




Advertisements









rightads.gif

beltwaybloggers.gif

insiderslogo.jpg

mba_blue.gif

Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile

Contact

Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]

Fresh Links

Credits

Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login



Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy