Untangle the legislation to clarify the issues

When developing federal legislation, why is it necessary to package so many things together? There are climate change initiatives, child care tax credits, pre-K care, Medicare enhancements, affordable housing, corporate tax rates, prescription drug provisions, union organizing rules, all packed into one bill?

So, if you're against $550 billion of climate change initiatives, then you are automatically against child care or lowering drug prices?

Why don't they separate out these dozens of different things into separate bills? So, if you're for lower prescription drug prices or child care, but against union organizing rules or charging stations, then you can vote yes or no for each provision.

Under the current system, legislators can be criticized for being against provisions they would support, like Medicare enhancements, but they are tied into provisions they don't support, like building 500,000 charging stations for electric cars.

This is clearly a strategy to get things approved that would not stand on their own.

I encourage legislators to separate these provisions from one bill into several. Then we can see what people are truly for and no one can be accused of hurting grandma for opposing a provision that has nothing to do with grandma.

John Behof


Article Comments
Guidelines: Keep it civil and on topic; no profanity, vulgarity, slurs or personal attacks. People who harass others or joke about tragedies will be blocked. If a comment violates these standards or our terms of service, click the "flag" link in the lower-right corner of the comment box. To find our more, read our FAQ.