Sorry, I didn't read through all the responses but just wanted to make a couple comments....
Regarding the comments about the unfair parliamentary rule workaround, I agree with the spirit of your argument, however wouldn't you agree that the filibuster has been grossly overused recently? In the good old days it was RARELY used -- and only in what deemed to be emergency situations. Now it is standard procedure to use it. Doesn't that violate the intent of the constitution that a simple majority in both houses is all that is needed to pass a bill?
My other comment about the health care bill is, how can anyone really know whether it is good or not? Has anyone actually read the hundreds (thousands?) of pages that make up the bill -- and understood it? You get excerpts of information from pundits but can they really be trusted not to spin things? The big problem here is that bills in general are way too difficult to understand. It's nearly impossible to know what good or bad will come from all this ridiculously complex legislation. Time to simplify things so people can understand what they are supporting or not supporting.
|