Why's tacking an unpopulr bill onto another bill,often burying it,allowed?

[henslee]

It just seems so obviously sneaky and wrong. Like waiting for a friday before vacation and voting for a payhike hidden in the defense bill blah blah blah -- I mean, really, can someone explain this too me?

[marmar]

1. Because our system of government doesn't work...

We need a parliament!

[msongs]

2. sneaks, thieves, deceit, cowardice, any others you care to add?

and because the congress persons of both parties do not have the integrity needed
to change this abysmal system.

Msongs
www.msongs.com/chinamart.htm

[neweurope]

3. I've been wondering - from all the thing in US politics this is the one

I least understand. I've been sitting here shaking my head in wonder time and again. What I especially cannot understand is why they vote on this - and not just walk out, protesting.

----------------

Remember Fallujah

Bush to The Hague!

[tx_dem41]

4. Both parties have done it for years. n/t

[sandnsea]

9. Yeah, Democrats "sneak" in parks

In things like the 1996 Omnibus "Park Barrell" Bill that created, gasp, a "whole bunch of heritage areas".

http://www.landrights.org/Alert15.htm

Let's see what other sneaky stuff I can find on them rascally Democrats.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

5. This is the constitutional amendment that we need, the one

that would do more good than any single constitutional amendment one could think of:

"No bill presented to Congress shall deal with more than one subject."

Oregon (and probably other states as well) has this in its constitution, and the provision has allowed the state supreme court there to strike down some really awful bills, because the Republicanites couldn't stay on topic. :-)

Let every bill be debated on its own merits! No more hiding bad bills inside good ones!

[feelthebreeze]

6. Good one for 06, after vote confidence is restored:PB/OS

[SPKrazy]

12. I would agree except

it would be a libertarian's dream!

Nothing would ever get done.

Too many bills to bring to the floor, debate, and vote.

I don't think that is the answer, although I don't know the answer.

The winner gets the spoils. Happens in state legislatures too. Some really unpalatable amendment added to a bill and gets through, or spoils the bill.

[Orsino]

7. It's actually a valuable tool for compromise...

...when not practiced by a bunch of corporate whores. The party that controls a house determines what business gets before the body, and offers carrots to the minority in exchange for votes for their pet issues.

[CantGetFooledAgain]

8. There are many such examples.

The system is clearly broken. Nobody with the power to do so seems interested in fixing it. The very notion that an oil drilling amendment could legitimately be tacked on to a "must pass" spending bill sounds like something that children would invent.

The very first laws passed by a truly ethical Congress would prohibit such nonsense, and also would make verifiable, auditable, standardized voting the law of the land.

[SPKrazy]

10. Reagan and Clinton Didn't Think It was fair either!

And Clinton got them to pass (or maybe it was by executive order?) the "line item veto" to be able to excise things that the President didn't want out of a bill. The Supreme Court found that the line item veto was not constitutional so that is gone. (balance of power and all that, gave the exec. branch too much power)

But the piggy-backing of bills is as old as the United States of America. It is called POLITICS
and it's a mean game where the majority rules, and the minority suffers. That's why we have to get the house and/or Senate back in 06, or * and the Repugs will totally destroy this great country!

[ddeclue]

11. WEASELS IN CONGRESS

NUFF SAID

[jackpan1260]

13. So what is the solution to this problem? eom