72 hours is not too long to read the bill

Congress has the responsibility to craft reasonable legislation which serves the American public. Many of the issues Congress deals with on a regular basis are simply too important to be rushed. Unfortunately, Members of Congress are too often asked to make decisions on bills which can have more pages than major novels with only a few hours to actually read them.

On at least two dozen occasions in the 111th Congress, accepted transparency rules have been shelved in order to rush legislation to a final vote. These hasty votes can have severe consequences, such as the provision tucked into the Troubled Assets Relief Act (TARP) -- a trillion-dollar package passed in just 15 hours -- which had the effect of authorizing retroactive bonuses to executives of bailed-out insurance giant AIG.

According to the Sunlight Foundation, this year 24 pieces of legislation have been passed in less than 72 hours -- including the Medicare Premium Fairness Act (7 hours), Consumer Assistance to Recycle and Save Act (10 hours), and legislation to impose an additional tax on the bonuses awarded by TARP to the very AIG executives described above (11 hours).

I voted against such legislation as the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act and the Auto Industry Financing and Restructuring Act in part because these spending measures were passed with haste and lacked the transparency in which sound legislation should be crafted.

The stimulus package which spent $790 billion (and which clocked in at 1,073 pages) wasn't posted on the government's website until after 10:00 p.m. the day before final passage. The infamous cap-and-trade legislation included a 316-page amendment added at 3:09 a.m. on the day of its passage. When Minority Leader John Boehner attempted to educate his fellow members by reviewing passages before the final vote, he was criticized for holding up the debate.

On June 17 a resolution was introduced to require legislation be available on the Internet for 72 hours before consideration by the House of Representatives. This measure (H.Res. 554) emerged in response to Congress passing the rushed, unsound legislation I have described above, which has radically expanded the government's role in our everyday lives and intruded on our free-market system.

The legislation would require all non-emergency legislation to be posted online, in final form, for at least 72 hours prior to a floor vote.

Like many of my constituents, I believe Members of Congress should be given enough time to properly read and evaluate legislation before voting. This bipartisan resolution merits consideration, and I have joined 182 of my colleagues in signing a discharge petition which, with 218 signatures, would automatically place H.Res. 554 on the House schedule for a vote, moving it out of the committee in which it has been languishing for months.

The "read the bill" push has gained the support of an overwhelming majority of Americans, government watchdog groups, and a bipartisan group of elected officials.

Both parties have been guilty of rushing through legislation without giving Members of Congress and the American people an opportunity to actually read the legislation before it is brought up for a final vote.

Now we have a bipartisan solution. It is an effort to bring greater accountability and transparency to how Congress spends the taxpayers' money.

The American people and their representatives should have a reasonable opportunity to read a bill and understand its impact and cost before a vote occurs. With health care reform legislation making its way through Washington, having the opportunity to review the legislation and to hear from constituents is not a luxury -- it is a necessity.