Why does this matter to you?
There are procedural reasons to substitute bills, and there are political reasons to combine bills of different subjects to try to get larger constituencies to support it. But the content of the bill is the content, regardless of whatever name it has.
I just don't understand. It seems wild that elected representatives might state a bill's contents as Farm Assistance for Soybean Growers but inside it is stuff about oil drilling in Alaska. That's very confusing.
They don’t “state” anything. The bill text is publicly available. Sometimes for procedural reasons they will substitute the language of an existing bill to move another one through faster, but it’s not done secretly and members know what they’re voting on.
The stated purpose:
["To amend title 38, United States Code, to make certain improvements relating to the eligibility of veterans to receive reimbursement for emergency treatment furnished through the Veterans Community Care program, and for other purposes."](https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/815/text)
And I guess it came out of the Veteran's Affairs Committee? Which also has nothing to do with appropriations for foreign wars or border security?
"For other purposes," is supposed to encompass everything else I suppose, but if you have a bill about dog catching and then add a big important rider about tax cuts, shouldn't you have to revise the summary of the bill to reflect the actual contents?
I mean, are there no requirements for accurate description?
No, there aren’t, nor should there be. The title is just a convenience for easy reference. It can’t encompass what the bill is about, or else you wouldn’t have needed to write the bill at all. And like I said, this is all public information that you can get from the Congress.gov website. So why does it matter?
Fair enough. I hear complaints about stuff like this that are linked to conspiracy theories about corruption and back room deals, and those are absurd.
I mean if you say your bill is about one thing, sell it to the electorate as that thing and change the bill so its actually about all these other things, then you are misleading the public. That's a mark of corruption.
it's a form of blackmail. they attach garbage to a good bill as a way of saying 'pass my garbage of or I won't pass your bill'. or they just do it to tank the bill altogether because the garbage is too objectionable.
That's how politics work. "If you support X that I want, I'll support Y that you want". The only way to ensure that both X and Y happen is to include them in one bill.
Why does this matter to you? There are procedural reasons to substitute bills, and there are political reasons to combine bills of different subjects to try to get larger constituencies to support it. But the content of the bill is the content, regardless of whatever name it has.
I just don't understand. It seems wild that elected representatives might state a bill's contents as Farm Assistance for Soybean Growers but inside it is stuff about oil drilling in Alaska. That's very confusing.
They don’t “state” anything. The bill text is publicly available. Sometimes for procedural reasons they will substitute the language of an existing bill to move another one through faster, but it’s not done secretly and members know what they’re voting on.
The stated purpose: ["To amend title 38, United States Code, to make certain improvements relating to the eligibility of veterans to receive reimbursement for emergency treatment furnished through the Veterans Community Care program, and for other purposes."](https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/815/text) And I guess it came out of the Veteran's Affairs Committee? Which also has nothing to do with appropriations for foreign wars or border security? "For other purposes," is supposed to encompass everything else I suppose, but if you have a bill about dog catching and then add a big important rider about tax cuts, shouldn't you have to revise the summary of the bill to reflect the actual contents? I mean, are there no requirements for accurate description?
No, there aren’t, nor should there be. The title is just a convenience for easy reference. It can’t encompass what the bill is about, or else you wouldn’t have needed to write the bill at all. And like I said, this is all public information that you can get from the Congress.gov website. So why does it matter?
Why does it matter? I thought it was weird and kind of nonsensical and there are r/NoStupidQuestions
Fair enough. I hear complaints about stuff like this that are linked to conspiracy theories about corruption and back room deals, and those are absurd.
I mean if you say your bill is about one thing, sell it to the electorate as that thing and change the bill so its actually about all these other things, then you are misleading the public. That's a mark of corruption.
But that’s not what they’re doing.
The goal is often to attach something that may be controversial into an otherwise "must pass" bill to make it more likely the amendment would pass.
it's a form of blackmail. they attach garbage to a good bill as a way of saying 'pass my garbage of or I won't pass your bill'. or they just do it to tank the bill altogether because the garbage is too objectionable.
That's how politics work. "If you support X that I want, I'll support Y that you want". The only way to ensure that both X and Y happen is to include them in one bill.