●Stories
●Firehose
●All
●Popular
●Polls
●Software
●Thought Leadership
Submit
●
Login
●or
●
Sign up
●Topics:
●Devices
●Build
●Entertainment
●Technology
●Open Source
●Science
●YRO
●Follow us:
●RSS
●Facebook
●LinkedIn
●Twitter
●
Youtube
●
Mastodon
●Bluesky
Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!
Forgot your password?
Close
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Load All Comments
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
/Sea
Score:
5
4
3
2
1
0
-1
More
Login
Forgot your password?
Close
Close
Log In/Create an Account
●
All
●
Insightful
●
Informative
●
Interesting
●
Funny
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
byAnonymous Coward writes:
And then President Marissa Mayer should fire them for not working.
byNidi62 ( 1525137 ) writes:
They don't work now, so why not? I mean hell, the Senate just passed a budget for the first time in how many years?
bydownix ( 84795 ) writes:
You do realize that the budget is a meaningless piece of paper holding no authority, yes? Spending resolutions are the real thing and the Senate has passed those. Why waste time on hollow gestures with no authority?
Parent
twitter
facebook
bydavester666 ( 731373 ) writes:
Because it makes it look like they are doing work?
Like connecting to the VPN at work, then having a script 'check' for new mail with a random time interval between 5-15 minutes.
bynoh8rz10 ( 2716597 ) writes:
here's the deal though: the things that congress actually does in chambers - voting, whatnot - are like 2% of their actual jobs. The other 98% are meetings, etc. you cant do this from palooka MT.
byTapeCutter ( 624760 ) writes:
This is the direct equivalent of a company lawyer giving a go/nogo on a contract he hasn't read.
Not really. more akin to a board member who relies on the company lawyer to get it right. I do exactly the same thing when buying a house, I don't read the contract, I pay a lawyer to translate it into English. Politicians have a small army of qualified staff to ensure the bill meets their expectations, that's not negligence it's proper due diligence.
The real problem in the US system is that it is considered normal for politicians to blatantly represent the interests of their sponsors, not the national i
byshugah ( 881805 ) writes:
The real problem is that so many Americans have come to believe that the interests of the corporate sponsors are the same as theirs so dutifully parrot talking points that are not in their own interest.
bygd2shoe ( 747932 ) writes:
Politicians have a small army of qualified staff to ensure the bill meets their expectations, that's not negligence it's proper due diligence.
(1) They have fewer than you'd think.
(2) Even they don't often read everything.
(3) Often staff members have $$$ jobs lined up for when their boss leaves office. ("We're not being bribed! We swear!" - This is a real problem, even for the rare honest politician or two.)
(4) They should STILL read each bill all the way through at least once before being briefed by their
byDarkOx ( 621550 ) writes:
That's not negligence it's proper due diligence.
Not buying your argument. An important aspect of our law is the principle that it should be understandable by a person of normal ability. If a Senator or Congress person (who we might reasonably expect to be on the upper end of the ability curve to begin with) needs are army of lawyers and staff to figure out what bill does; its not good legislation.
byshugah ( 881805 ) writes:
The biggest downside is the inevitable tax payer funded broadband and video conferencing equipment in every member of Congress's homes. Probably cheaper than all the airfare, but I can bet a lot of members get the tax payer to fund their video toys, but still spend most of their time in Washington, because it's preferable to actually spending time in the dirty little backwaters they represent.
bydavester666 ( 731373 ) writes:
They haven't heard of direct deposit?
byOpportunist ( 166417 ) writes:
It's kinda more traceable than that briefcase o'money.
byOpportunist ( 166417 ) writes:
You mean lobbying would get more expensive and quite hard to pull off sensibly since you can't buy politicians by the batch anymore but have to pick them out one by one?
The telecommuting idea just gained some merit, ya know?
byshugah ( 881805 ) writes:
Now there's a thought, force the Gucci clad lawyers to go pay a visit to Senator Elmer Fudd and all of his inbred cousins back on the farm.
bysjames ( 1099 ) writes:
Considering that they mostly meet with corporate lobbyists, that may be an improvement for democracy.
●urrent threshold.
bygodrik ( 1287354 ) writes:
Why at random interval? My mail client fetches email automatically at a fixed interval. Random interval would actually look stranger during an audit.
byOpportunist ( 166417 ) writes:
The US are still electing a president and make a big fuss over it, and you complain about that?
byDarkOx ( 621550 ) writes:
Should not matter; they have a statutory obligation to produce a budget meaningless or not. This is the problem with this country we have a legislature that is more an more above the law or otherwise removed from the consequences of their own actions.
A huge portion of people get a tax refund when the file, even if you are one of these; try not submitting a 1040 this year, I dare you. The government should not care right? If anything they are getting more money.
Obligations are obligations. I am sure you
●nt threshold.
There may be more comments in this discussion. Without JavaScript enabled, you might want to turn on Classic Discussion System in your preferences instead.
Slashdot
●
●
Submit Story
It is much harder to find a job than to keep one.
●FAQ
●Story Archive
●Hall of Fame
●Advertising
●Terms
●Privacy Statement
●About
●Feedback
●Mobile View
●Blog
Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information
Copyright © 2026 Slashdot Media. All Rights Reserved.
×
Close
Working...
Working...