Read the Bills, Write the Laws

By: BJ Lawson

It’s no secret that Washington is broken. We must reject our legislators’ fondness for voting on bills based upon catchy titles and vapid summaries. As our current Rep. David Price reveals, there is a difference between reading legislation and “considering” it:

A further example of Congress’ madness is its tendency to not even write laws anymore. Instead, Congress passes unread legislation that authorizes unelected bureaucrats and other “interested” yet unaccountable parties to write regulations. What results is the worst of both worlds — regulations far too complex to implement or understand, laden with conflicts of interest from those who wrote the regulations, and often missing the intent of the original legislation.

Campaign finance reform is one area where Congress’ regulatory attempts have backfired spectacularly:

A federal appeals court overturned four campaign regulations Friday that remain incomplete six years after Congress approved a landmark election-law overhaul.

The Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia agreed with a lower court that Federal Election Commission regulations dealing with coordination between campaigns and outside advocates must be rewritten.

The appeals court also agreed with Rep. Christopher Shays , R-Conn., a chief sponsor of the law (PL 107-155), that a regulation dealing with fundraising at state-level events that the District Court upheld should instead be overturned.

Judge David S. Tatel, writing for the three-judge panel, found the regulations either contrary to the law or arbitrary. The court sent the FEC back to the drawing board “in the hope that, as the nation enters the thick of the fourth election cycle since [the law’s] passage, the commission will issue regulations consistent with the act’s text and purpose.”

Here’s the funny part, worthy of Heller himself:

But the results are unclear. The flawed regulations will remain in effect until they are rewritten. But the commission has been unable to function this year for lack of a quorum, although nominations to fill the panel are pending in the Senate.

“We’ve just gotten the opinion and are reviewing it, so we don’t really have any comment now,” said Bob Biersack, an FEC spokesman. “It will be up to the commission to decide how to proceed.

North Carolina’s 4th District deserves representation that will read the bills before voting. We must not let our elected representatives unconstitutionally delegate their legislative power. As your Congressman, I will support the Read the Bills Act, and the Write the Laws Act.

19 Responses to “Read the Bills, Write the Laws”

  1. Minnesota Chris Says:

    How can anyone say with a straight face that he/she “considered” the PATRIOT Act when it was literally impossible to read before the vote? You’ve got truth on your side BJ, keep it coming!

  2. Adam Says:

    BJ, I have to say, that was pretty gutsy. I admire the poise with which you conducted yourself, and would imagine it must have been pretty hard not to hit the guy with a couple of follow-ups (”Did you actually read the full text of the bill, though? And did you specifically vote yes or no on the two bills to which I referred?”)…but I think that simply posing your question and letting him flail around, then saying “Thank you” and taking your seat was the classier route to take. He was obviously just waiting for a chance to paint you as trying to instigate trouble, but you didn’t give him that opening. Well done.

  3. Zane Whitener Says:

    Excellent job B.J.! I was very impressed with your professionalism and approach. I am completely behind you and all others that are fighting diligently beside you for EVERYONE’s civil liberties. You have my vote. I will spread the word around my workplace, other DO THE SAME!

  4. Virginian Rebel Says:

    I am very much looking forward to your debates with Rep. Price as well. Both the “Read the Bills Act” and “Write the Laws Act” would be tremendous victories for the American people.

  5. Mark Says:

    Nice video.
    So.. when do the debates start?

  6. Lyssa Says:

    The PATRIOT Act was imposed on congress, they were give only an hour to decide on how to vote on it. Congress was being pressured and they were also dealing with a bomb scare in Washington, an anthrax scare and a nation wide terror alert. Their fears were exploited by the Administration as our fears were exploited by the Administration when we were told that Iraq had WMD and that we could not wait for the smoking gun that comes in the form of a mushroom cloud. We all know in hind-sight that Iraq posed no threat to us. I believe the “Read the Bills Act” and the “Write the Laws Act” would protect the Congress and the American people from such exploitation in the future.

  7. Michael Shanklin Says:

    I know you are fighting a good cause BJ. You might remember me, we marched in downtown Raleigh on New Years today together. Anyways, thanks for standing up for our rights and liberties. People like us make the world go round. Never stop spreading the education of liberty!

  8. Alan in Raleigh Says:

    and no “parent” bill shall ever have any attachment or rider which is not clearly and explicitly RELEVANT to the “parent” bill.

  9. Kate Says:

    Mr. Lawson , the people need you in congress. God Bless!

  10. Kyle Says:

    Way to go, B.J.

    This type of open dialog between the candidates is a great way for the people to see and hear what they are really about. Most debates are too scripted for us to be confident we know how a candidate actually feels about an issue. By addressing your question as a member of the citizenry, you showed everyone how much of a “real” person you are and that you’re not someone who feels entitled to the position of Representative of the 4th District of North Carolina, but someone who’ll truly represent US. Keep up the good work. If more candidates follow your lead, we really can bring change to Washington.

  11. Loren Ward Says:

    Dang BJ you got him nervous. I don’t see congressmen squirm like that often enough. great job.

  12. Apex Fan Says:

    David Price is a condescending elitist to whom I’ve written many times asking for his representation of my opinion in his votes. He has replied each time with the equivalent of a pat on the head and a “I know better than you do” response, which is infuriating. That is why I am thrilled that BJ Lawson is running and is standing behind common sense and the Constitution as the basis for his representation of us. Thank you, BJ, for your efforts to date. I will tell everyone I know to vote for you as I will be doing in November.

  13. Duff OMelia Says:

    Well done BJ. A simple, respectful question. I dig it.

  14. Magnus Says:

    I caught B.J. today a couple of times at the Take Back Our State rally in Raleigh. Instead of hiding in a tent like the other political candidates, B.J. was walking around and talking to people, in small groups or even one at a time.

  15. Dan Says:

    Liberty is PRICEless!

  16. Rob D. Says:

    Mr. Smith, I mean Mr. Lawson goes to Washington :o)
    We can only hope.

    I’ll be throwing some money your way along with a donation to Bob Barr on his money bomb day.

  17. John C. Randolph Says:

    BJ, you nailed him to the wall, and that’s not an easy thing to do with an opponent who’s as slippery as congressman Price.

    I hope you have some better quality video and audio of that event, that you can use in your campaign ads. It’s perfectly clear that Price dodges the question because he knows he was wrong.

    -jcr

  18. Justin B. Clark Says:

    You got him BJ :) Keep it up. We’re working hard for you!!

  19. Leo Womble Says:

    A 19th century Catholic bishop once said, according to A. Nock, that trying to deceive one’s listeners…letting them believe something that was not true…was to lie. When David Price responded to B. Lawson, he was trying to delude his audience–he was lying to them. Not only did Price lie, but the lie was as blatant and incompetently delivered as any that George W. Bush has told. He could not possibly have read the act prior to voting. He could not possibly have “considered” the act in any meaningful, rational manner. David Price is a liar–and a poor one at that!

Leave a Reply