3 ms·

Introducing a bill that you have no intention of passing (or do not expect to pass) is like submitting a pull request that you know will get rejected. It would

• dragonwriter 12y ago
  Passing laws requires getting other people to vote on them, which in practice requires mobilizing groups interested in the topic, which in turn requires getting attention on the issue, which in turn is often served by introducing bills on the issue, even if those don't pass. So, even if one views the job of a legislator as "passing laws", introducing bills that are not expected to pass as a means of raising awareness, in order that bills on the issue may be more viable to pass in the future, is a legislator doing their job.
  • gtaylor 12y ago
    Indeed. There are whole third party presidential candidates whose "real" goal is to do this with their platforms.
  • DannyBee 12y ago
    "Passing laws requires getting other people to vote on them, which in practice requires mobilizing groups interested in the topic, which in turn requires getting attention on the issue, which in turn is often served by introducing bills on the issue, even if those don't pass." Actually, in practice, it happens exactly the other way around. IE you get support first, then introduce the bill.
• late2part 12y ago
  When a person is in a no-win situation, is it better to do some good, or to try to do the right thing? This is a difficult question. When you can't win - you should work to change the rules. I don't agree that this bill has no chance of passing - we should not endorse regression to the mean.