Want “New Ideas,” In Congress? Limit How Often They Can Propose Old Ones.

Image for post
Image for post

It’s not that we need new ideas, but we need to stop having old ones.

-Edwin Land

he Born Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act recently failed in Congress . . . for the 74th time. Personally, I thought the Bill was complete nonsense.

For those who don’t remember, the legislation would force hospitals to care for a fetus if it were to survive a failed abortion. While I understand the idea, in fact even as someone who is pro-choice I could see myself supporting it, the legislation would obviously be unenforceable. What would happen if a hospital refused? They’d be sued. By whom? The mother who just tried to get the child aborted?

Mind you, their are stories of men who do protest there girlfriend or wife getting an abortion. John Ryan, a pro-life activist, posted a video this father’s day on his Facebook page of a man standing outside an abortion clinic begging for his (I think) wife to not have an abortion. However, how would he know if the child was “born alive”? He’s not in the room the abortion is taking place, he’s not even inside the clinic. Does he plan on going dumpster diving afterwards just to be sure? How will he know if it belongs to his girlfriend?

But that’s all besides the point. Think about this, the Born Alive Abortion Survivors Protect Act has been introduced into Congress 74 times. The 116th Congress has been in office for 196 days. This means they have failed it once every 2.6 days, or slightly less often than once every other day.

I wasn’t even aware Congress was in session this often.

The earliest example I can find of this bill failing was 2/25/2019. At time of writing, that was 143 days ago. This means the bill fails once ever 1.9 days, or less than every other day.

Again, Congress is in session way more often than I thought.

I can’t help but find if funny, by the way, that while Republicans are screaming Democrats need to address the “crisis at the boarder,” they’re wasting time in Congress passing legislation they know is going to fail.

However, I must ask, why is someone allowed to introduce the same legislation into Congress 74 times? Regardless of how you feel about this legislation, the pro-life Republicans are simply playing a game of spamming Congress with the same legislation in hopes maybe it will pass. It’s no different than a 5 year old asking to do something an hour after being told no.

A similar thing happened after Obamacare was passed. Just between its passing and 2/3/2015, the Republican controlled House had voted to repeal the ACA 67 times. Between January 2011 and March 2014, the running total was 54 times. In February 2011 alone, the 2nd month the House was under Republican control, they had voted to repeal it 10 different times.

Even as someone who hates the Affordable Care Act, this is simply unacceptable. While I’m all for slowing down the legislative process, I simply can not support obstruction at this level.

To fix this problem, I have proposed a simple, yet impossible, Constitutional Amendment. Although, to any Congressional Representatives who like this idea, make sure you introduce it as often as possible.

Section 1: No member of Congress shall be allowed to introduce any more than ten failing legislation per Congress. A Congress shall be defined as starting when the newest group of elected Representatives enter Congress after a natural election. A natural election is simply a non-special election. Failed Legislation is any legislation that is voted down by Congress.

This is also important as members of Congress who introduce failed legislation should not be allowed to legislate without a cool down period. If you’re always passing successful legislation, you must be doing something right. As such, the amendment would only count “failed legislation” towards this limit.

I can already hear some saying this will cause “lame duck sessions.” Funny these say people most worried about “lame duck sessions,” are the ones who complain the most about our government.

However, if 5,350 failed legislation too few for our current system, it has problems that can’t be fixed with just one amendment.

This would also do two things:

First off, it would eliminate legislation designed to fail. For instance, Mitch McConnell once introduced the Green New Deal into the Senate hoping it would fail. This just wasted the time of everyone both in Congress and watching CSPAN.

This would also make legislators much less likely to just go with the winds. While something like the PATRIOT Act could possibly pass, the threat of a failing legislation would make it so anything a Representative would wish to introduce would have to be very important.

Section 2: A bill that fails will not be allowed to be reintroduced until the next Congress takes control. Reintroduction is defined as simply introducing a bill that has previously failed into Congress before the next Congress takes over.

Section 3: The Congress will have the power to enforce this with legislation.

I can not find a valid argument against this legislation.

Writer On Both History And Politics; Peaceful Globalist; Follow My Twitter: @EphromJosine1

Get the Medium app

A button that says 'Download on the App Store', and if clicked it will lead you to the iOS App store
A button that says 'Get it on, Google Play', and if clicked it will lead you to the Google Play store