Making law in secret by "unanimous consent"

[unixronin]

U.S. Senator Jim DeMint (R-South Carolina) voices concerns that the Senate passes over 90% of legislation without any debate, without amendment, and without a roll call vote.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again.  If you think your bill needs to be passed unread and without amendments or a recorded vote, then I suggest that on the contrary, it almost certainly means it should not be passed at all.  Because if your bill is a benefit to the nation, then why do you need to hide it from the nation until it's a fait accompli and conceal who voted to pass it?

Comments

[randwolf.livejournal.com]

We lost many freedoms in "the big zero (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/28/opinion/28krugman.html)," and the Senate has participated. Watching the Senate's interaction with the financial and health insurance industry, it is clear that a small group dominates the Senate--or rather that a majority Senators represent various elite factions. Reading history, it appears this has been the case from the from the inception of the US republic. I will admit that I don't know that a unicameral legislature would have fared better, but I doubt it would have done worse.

My impression of Russia was that she made huge mistakes in the economic reforms of the 1980s and the rest followed. How do you see a different legislative model as preventing this? Come to that, the USA made similar mistakes in the same period--Russia was following the same theories that the US was using. Um. Now, that's interesting...