Do you support HR 6635: One Bill One Subject?

https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-bill/6635/text

 

H.R.6635 - One Bill, One Subject Transparency Act

 

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the “One Bill, One Subject Transparency Act”.

SEC. 2. ONE SUBJECT PER BILL.

(a) One Subject.—Each bill or joint resolution shall embrace no more than one subject.

 

(b) Subject In Title.—The subject of a bill or joint resolution shall be clearly and descriptively expressed in the title.

 

(c) Appropriation Bills.—An appropriations bill shall not contain any general legislation or change of existing law provision which is not germane to the subject matter of the underlying bill. This subsection does not prohibit any provision imposing limitations upon the expenditure of appropriated funds.

SEC. 3. ENFORCEMENT.

 

(a) Multiple Subjects In Title.—If the title of an Act or joint resolution addresses two or more unrelated subjects, then the entire Act or joint resolution is void.

 

(b) Provisions Not Expressed In Title.—If an Act or joint resolution contains provisions concerning a subject that is not clearly and descriptively expressed in its title, those provisions shall be void.

 

(c) Appropriation Provisions Outside Subcommittee Jurisdiction.—If an Act appropriating funds contains a provision outside of the jurisdiction of the relevant subcommittee of the Committees on Appropriations of the House and of the Senate, and therefore outside the subject of the bill, then such provision shall be void.

 

(d) Provisions Of Appropriation Bills Not Germane To Subject Matter.—If an Act appropriating funds contains general legislation or change of existing law provision not germane to the subject matter of the underlying bill, then every such provision shall be void.

 

(e) Commencement Of An Action.—Any person, including a Member of the House of Representatives or a Member of the Senate, aggrieved by the enforcement or threat of enforcement of Acts that do not comply with section 2 shall have a cause of action under sections 2201 and 2202 of title 28, United States Code, against the United States to seek appropriate relief, including an injunction against the enforcement of any law, the passage of which did not conform to section 2 or this section. The cause of action only applies to an Act or joint resolution signed into law on or after the date of enactment of this Act.

 

(f) State Of Review.—In any judicial action brought pursuant to subsection (e), the standard of review shall be de novo.

2 Likes

Fuck I wish, but politics are so goddamn dirty this will never ever happen. 

2 Likes

Support 100%.

 

Also who in Amrica, if held to a vote by the people would oppose term limits for ALL in govt. Any elected position has x amount of years max

 

Why don't they put that on the general ballot and let the people decide once and for all.

100%

Yes,Please.

Yep.

I can't wait to see how much pork gets rolled into this so it will pass.

Fighting -

Support 100%.


 


Also who in Amrica, if held to a vote by the people would oppose term limits for ALL in govt. Any elected position has x amount of years max


 


Why don't they put that on the general ballot and let the people decide once and for all.

This. 

Hell yes.  Enough with the bullshit.  Let laws pass or fail on their own individual merits. 

Watch this bill get passed with other topics included. 

how are they going to determine what constitutes a "subject" and how are they going to vet what does and doesn't satisfy those conditions?

Yes, but I am a lifelong libertarian. I honestly believe this is not something you guys do not want. Pork is the only way shit actually gets done in our federal system; most of you will be screaming from the rooftops when your pet projects stop coming to fruition once reelection results are tied to them.

Side note on barely related tangent: We already have term limits; they're called "elections".

jarroyo -

Watch this bill get passed with other topics included. 

LOL 

BarkLikeADog - Yes, but I am a lifelong libertarian. I honestly believe this is not something you guys do not want. Pork is the only way shit actually gets done in our federal system; most of you will be screaming from the rooftops when your pet projects stop coming to fruition once reelection results are tied to them.

Side note on barely related tangent: We already have term limits; they're called "elections".

You’re projecting your fears regarding this bill. Democrats need bill-stuffing to get their agenda implemented. 
 


Elections are not term limits.

1 Like

Fighting -

Support 100%.


 


Also who in Amrica, if held to a vote by the people would oppose term limits for ALL in govt. Any elected position has x amount of years max


 


Why don't they put that on the general ballot and let the people decide once and for all.

Term limits would be a big help

This would be awesome

I'm for it, but I doubt it'll pass. 

I'm also for minimum time limits that a bill has to be available online before it can be voted on. None of this, "here's a 300 page bill that'll be voted on in 45 minutes".

Hell, while at it, I'd also be for page limits on bills. If you need 800 pages to say something, you're probably further into the weeds then the federal government needs to be 

"You’re projecting your fears regarding this bill. Democrats need bill-stuffing to get their agenda implemented."

What fears do you think I have? This bill pass or fail doesn't change my outlook on us federal politics in the slightest.

Bill stuffing only happens because both sides want it. It's inherently bipartisan.

^^^^Agree with Trust 100% on the legal side. Optics matter in terms of elections, though.