5 ms·

Where can I see a list of all the unrelated riders added to this cybersecurity act? I heard utah senator was trying to get a ban on abortion in there. What i

by maeon3 14y ago

Where can I see a list of all the unrelated riders added to this cybersecurity act? I heard utah senator was trying to get a ban on abortion in there. What i want is github for all these sneaky slithery little laws that make it through the house and senate onto the books. It's so bad now, I don't even know what the law is, it's changing back and forth so fast. It's making everyone a criminal, even retroactively! Drugs.. Legal! Illegal! Abortion.. Legal! Illegal! Copying a floppy, owning a lobster, downloading a file, braiding hair without a license, filming a cop. I don't know american law and I live here.

joering2 14y ago
+1 I am with you!! we need a Wiki for politicians, so year later they cannot claim they were with or against something that is popular/unpopular right now. You know -- sort of transparency website with links to sources to every claim they make. I would love to look into it -- is there any API CrunBase-type with all senators I can tap into?
- ninetax 14y ago
  Maybe this will help? http://ballotpedia.org http://ballotpedia.org Something that could keep track of that kind of stuff might be hard because everyone has a bias. But I agree tacking is important!
- fleitz 14y ago
  They will still claim it. And it will still work, because no one but a couple policy wonk nerds actually care. Unless you can make it a theme like "waffles" or "flip-flops". They'll claim it until someone brings a gun to a theatre and then we're all distracted and wondering what they'll do about this situation. Even miraculously if people do care what they are going to say is that they are politicians who are responsive to grass roots movements and what the community wants and that they are changing their position to bring the people's message to corrupt fatcats in Washington. (Ever notice how your politician is honest jim the used car salesman and every other politician is a washington fatcat?)
- ktizo 14y ago
  The trick would be to throw d3.js at it and make it fun and have lots of animated stuff charting voting patterns and policy positions.
_delirium 14y ago
The full text is here (pdf): http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-112s3414pcs/pdf/BILLS-112s3414pcs.pdf http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-112s3414pcs/pdf/BILLS-112... No abortion in the final voted-on text, but you appear to be correct on the proposed amendment. Digging through the bowels of thomas.loc.gov, it looks like, somewhat bizarrely, Mike Lee (R-UT) proposed an amendment to the cybersecurity bill that would restrict abortion in Washington, D.C., under the federal government's legislative authority for the federal district: > SA 2716. Mr. LEE submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 3414, to enhance the security and resiliency of the cyber and communications infrastructure of the United States; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows: > At the appropriate place, insert the following: > SEC. __X. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA PAIN-CAPABLE UNBORN CHILD PROTECTION ACT. > (a) Short Title.--This section may be cited as the ``District of Columbia Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act''. > (b) Legislative Findings.--Congress finds and declares the following: > (1) Pain receptors (nociceptors) are present throughout the unborn child's entire body and nerves link these receptors to the brain's thalamus and subcortical plate by no later than 20 weeks after fertilization. etc.
- roc 14y ago
  1. The text wasn't voted on. The vote to stop talking about the issue and actually hold the vote on the text, failed. 2. It's not at all bizarre to see a Republican attach an abortion restriction onto a bill they want to kill.
  - Wohlf 14y ago
    The fact that it's allowed at all is pretty fucking bizarre. Wasn't there a bill going through to make bills only have one law/subject?
    - 385668 14y ago
      It's been attempted before, but that kind of thing is really hard to legislate effectively. At what point is something tangentially related? True, gun control and abortion bills should probably be kept separate, but what about closing the gun show loophole and also requiring conceal carry permits to have interviews? They're both about guns, but not the same issue relating to guns. It isn't really feasible, and even if it were, both parties like to pull the amend a bill to hell trick.
christphrdunder 14y ago
http://www.reddit.com/r/watchingcongress/ http://www.reddit.com/r/watchingcongress/ All bills in the House and Senate are posted by a bot, and editorializing is done in the comments. (The bot is also a github project.)

by maeon3 14y ago

joering2 14y ago

+1 I am with you!! we need a Wiki for politicians, so year later they cannot claim they were with or against something that is popular/unpopular right now. You know -- sort of transparency website with links to sources to every claim they make. I would love to look into it -- is there any API CrunBase-type with all senators I can tap into?

ninetax 14y ago
Maybe this will help? http://ballotpedia.org http://ballotpedia.org Something that could keep track of that kind of stuff might be hard because everyone has a bias. But I agree tacking is important!
fleitz 14y ago
They will still claim it. And it will still work, because no one but a couple policy wonk nerds actually care. Unless you can make it a theme like "waffles" or "flip-flops". They'll claim it until someone brings a gun to a theatre and then we're all distracted and wondering what they'll do about this situation. Even miraculously if people do care what they are going to say is that they are politicians who are responsive to grass roots movements and what the community wants and that they are changing their position to bring the people's message to corrupt fatcats in Washington. (Ever notice how your politician is honest jim the used car salesman and every other politician is a washington fatcat?)
ktizo 14y ago
The trick would be to throw d3.js at it and make it fun and have lots of animated stuff charting voting patterns and policy positions.

_delirium 14y ago

The full text is here (pdf): http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-112s3414pcs/pdf/BILLS-112s3414pcs.pdf http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-112s3414pcs/pdf/BILLS-112... No abortion in the final voted-on text, but you appear to be correct on the proposed amendment. Digging through the bowels of thomas.loc.gov, it looks like, somewhat bizarrely, Mike Lee (R-UT) proposed an amendment to the cybersecurity bill that would restrict abortion in Washington, D.C., under the federal government's legislative authority for the federal district: > SA 2716. Mr. LEE submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 3414, to enhance the security and resiliency of the cyber and communications infrastructure of the United States; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows: > At the appropriate place, insert the following: > SEC. __X. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA PAIN-CAPABLE UNBORN CHILD PROTECTION ACT. > (a) Short Title.--This section may be cited as the ``District of Columbia Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act''. > (b) Legislative Findings.--Congress finds and declares the following: > (1) Pain receptors (nociceptors) are present throughout the unborn child's entire body and nerves link these receptors to the brain's thalamus and subcortical plate by no later than 20 weeks after fertilization. etc.

roc 14y ago
1. The text wasn't voted on. The vote to stop talking about the issue and actually hold the vote on the text, failed. 2. It's not at all bizarre to see a Republican attach an abortion restriction onto a bill they want to kill.
- Wohlf 14y ago
  The fact that it's allowed at all is pretty fucking bizarre. Wasn't there a bill going through to make bills only have one law/subject?
  - 385668 14y ago
    It's been attempted before, but that kind of thing is really hard to legislate effectively. At what point is something tangentially related? True, gun control and abortion bills should probably be kept separate, but what about closing the gun show loophole and also requiring conceal carry permits to have interviews? They're both about guns, but not the same issue relating to guns. It isn't really feasible, and even if it were, both parties like to pull the amend a bill to hell trick.

christphrdunder 14y ago

http://www.reddit.com/r/watchingcongress/ http://www.reddit.com/r/watchingcongress/ All bills in the House and Senate are posted by a bot, and editorializing is done in the comments. (The bot is also a github project.)