Maybe it’s time for limits on laws (Nov. 20)
By Chuck Doud
The Madera Tribune
One of the suggestions being floated for reforming the California Legislature is limiting the number of bills any one legislator can introduce in any one year while the budget remains unpassed. I believe if that were put on the ballot tomorrow, it would pass.
Too many of the bills that are introduced do little except to clog the legislative pipeline. Most bills introduced are designed to deliver something to special interests. That often leads to bad lawmaking. It amounts to inviting your friends to a banquet, then serving four courses of dessert first. When it comes time to tackle the meat, potatoes and vegetables of legislation, little appetite remains for it.
The same kind of rule would be good for Congress. A limit could be put on how many bills any member of the House or the Senate could introduce in a single year. And it might not be a bad idea to put a limit on the the number of words in any one bill. The proposed Senate and House healthcare bills each have about 330,000 words. That’s absurd. Try reading something with 330,000 words in it, then interpret it. That’s on a word-count par with the King James Bible. The Constitution only has 8,100 words.
People shouldn’t have to spend months trying to figure out what one law means, espcially one on health care.
Laws should be easy for ordinary people to understand. They should be written in clear language, not bureaucratese. They shouldn’t take days to read. Making them too long or overcomplicated merely makes work for attorneys and judges who wind up duking out the meanings of laws in court.
Maybe that’s why so many people object to the 10 Commandments being posted in courthouses and other public buildings. Depending on which version you choose, they only consist of about 100 words, give or take a few.
