Immigration bill bloats to 867 pages
By John Seiler
As I mentioned two weeks ago, the Gang of 8 immigration bill, S. 744, extended to 844 pages of indecipherable governmentese. Here’s an example of what I quoted:
Page 65:
17 (ii) EXCEPTIONS.—The discretionary
18 authority under clause (i) may not be used
19 to waive—
20 ‘‘(I) subparagraph (B), (C),
21 (D)(ii), (E), (G), (H), or (I) of section
22 212(a)(2);
23 ‘‘(II) section 212(a)(3);
24 ‘‘(III) subparagraph (A), (C),
25 (D), or (E) of section 212(a)(10); or 66
Seriously. That’s the actual wording of the bill. You can look it up.
It’s been amended and the new version now extends to 867 pages of indecipherable governmentese. It’s inching toward the preposterous 2,409 pages of Obamacare. When Obamacare was passed, then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-San Francisco, famously said of it, “But we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it, away from the fog of controversy.” Three years later, we still don’t know what’s in it.
The same thing would happen if S. 744 ever becomes law, in whatever even more bloated size it might assume.
Although something has to be done on immigration, the last body to do it is the U.S. Congress. According to a poll in January, Congress is less popular than lice, Genghis Khan and getting a root canal.
Probably the best solution to the problem would be to exile all 535 members of Congress from the country and start over with new elections to replace them.
Related Articles
State of the Union won’t help shrinking CA middle class
California is a place where middle-class jobs are vanishing faster than a politician’s word of honor. But it’s not surprising
Post-Stockton, Democrat job-retention myth certain to be exposed
Both parties have bogus canards that they trot out when convenient. The worst example of this among Republicans is the
UC San Fran’ s hypocrisy on Prop. 29 campaign funding
May 25, 2012 By John Seiler I love this part of the political campaign, just before the election, because the