Forecast cloudy for transparency

It’s an open secret on Capitol Hill that most laws get passed without being read in full by lawmakers.

But Democrats, who control Congress and the White House, have found it hard to inaugurate a promised new era of transparency after criticizing Republicans for rushing major pieces of legislation.

The scramble to pass gigantic legislation became clear just weeks after President Obama took office, when members of the House of Representatives were given just 13 hours to examine the final version of a 1,000-plus-page, $787 billion stimulus billdespite a unanimous agreement to allow 48 hours after a conference report before voting.

Subsequent votes on an omnibus spending bill and a children’s health care measure similarly were held with less than the promised time for lawmakers to study the bills.

Just as worrisome for open-government advocates, members of the public don’t always have an opportunity — or a reasonable amount of time — to scrutinize legislation before it is considered on the floor.

“It’d be nice to know what you’re voting on. It’d be nice if our citizens knew what we are voting on,” said Rep. Roscoe G.Bartlett, Maryland Republican. “We’re supposed to have representative government, and they really can’t weigh in about something if they don’t know what it is.”

(Corrected paragraph:) Mr. Bartlett is co-sponsoring a resolution to amend House rules to require non-emergency bills to be available to members 10 days before a vote, with substantive changes requiring an extra three-day wait period.

The Sunlight Foundation, a nonpartisan group devoted to transparency, is pushing a rule change that would require legislation to be posted and available for 72 hours before a vote. Lisa Rosenberg, head of the foundation’s Read the Bill initiative, noted that the current congressional protocol on posting bills is inconsistent.

Lisa Rosenberg, head of the foundation’s Read the Bill initiative, noted that the current congressional protocol on posting bills is inconsistent.

“It is ad hoc,” she said. “Sometimes bills are available on a [House] Rules Committee site; sometimes they’re on the majority leader’s Web site or the speaker’s Web site. Sometimes [the bill] is on the committee of jurisdiction’s site, so you don’t know where you’re actually going to find these bills.”

The aim of the 72-hour-rule, she said, is “to improve the debate between constituents and their representatives. That debate can’t begin unless folks know what members of Congress are doing.”

The Sunlight Foundation has pushed for reform via Twitter, blogging and compiling a bipartisan list of endorsements. An online petition has nearly 8,0000 signatures.

The group is focusing on the House of Representatives right now, but Ms. Rosenberg said it hopes to find a champion in the Senate as well. Forcing bills through quickly is not as much of an issue in the upper chamber, where the rules make it easier for the minority party or even a single senator to hold up action.

Mr. Bartlett said making the bills public for 72 hours is not only good government but would help lawmakers have a better idea of legislation on which they’re voting. In the case of huge legislation such as the stimulus bill, portions are divided among staff members who are responsible for vetting that section.

“The sky’s not going to fall if we pass [a bill] the day after tomorrow,” Mr. Bartlett said. “Even a single staff person doesn’t know what’s in another staff person’s part of the bill. Members have a general perception of what’s in the bill, but the ‘legalese’ and details are frequently left to staff.”

Story Continues →