User:George Orwell III/sandbox


 * Even if such a task were to be undertaken, I'm afraid it would not last for long; largely because the public at large is generally clueless as to how government and the legislative process work. And this lack of understanding is perpetually being reinforced by most major U.S. news outlets nowadays to make the most benign of congressional or presidential actions seem spectacular or scandalous in order just to secure a percentage point or two of higher ratings or increased web traffic. Quickly [I hope]... the provisions in newly enacted laws like this typically amend existing law to some degree and the remainder of the bill will be geared to establishing completely new statute. This not only means the existing regulations based on the authority delegated or granted to various government entities by the now amended portions of the previous standing law need to be brought into compliance with the new law but entire new swaths of regulations will need to be proposed, debated, vetted and finalized at the same time. Congress largely avoids getting into the real-world "weeds" of daily Federal management or the prescribing of such regulations when crafting legislation. They leave the legislative language "loose" enough that providing a starting point and a desired end point (policy wise) is enough "work" for them. How to actually get from one point to the other is delegated to various federal agencies, cabinet secretaries and similar - and that's usually the point where the media and the public at large stop paying attention or opt to remain clueless by design. The hidden "truth" here is that implementation has slowly been taking place all this time and not much, if anything, should come as a surprise to anyone who has been paying attention all this time. So much has been proposed, debated, reviewed, discarded, revised, expanded, studied, delegated, defined, codified and published it would make your head explode. And its all published on just about a daily basis -- and freely available 98% of the time online. The problem, however, is there is not much in the way of advertising money to be made or personal satisfaction to be gained from reading the Federal Register, Regulations.gov or similar government reporters. It seems only the predictions & revelations voiced into focus weeks if not years before they actually come to a reality are worth "reporting" if and when they finally 'hit the fan' (its easier rope viewers/readers in that way too).  So you can re-arrange, remove or reinvigorate the content all you like, it will still be omitting a vast portions of the actual methods, means and mechanics taking place during this period. The majority of folks will still be shocked or amazed at the drop of the silliest dime and the hardcore political folks will continue going about spreading nonsense or promoting excrement. Take today's latest drive-by postings for example "...14 changes to the ACA by Obama made without Congress, rah, rah, rah (paraphrased). Not once, though, will you ever never ever get the specific statute or regulation that Obama has allegedly "overwritten" or "usurped"; why? Because if they did specify what section, paragraph or clause is being violated and we looked it up, the statute could say something as straight forward as "Congress authorizes the President to do x, y, and z when implementing this, that or the other thing if and when he determines the time is right", if not provide some sort of vague authority that only the high courts could identify as lawful or unlawful. But, again its easier to drink the Kool-aide and keep counting make believe laws that Obama is breaking than sitting down and absorbing the material week in and week out.  All that said, I'm indifferent to the proposal at this point. You can probably surmise why from the above. -- George Orwell III (talk) 23:15, 22 December 2013 (UTC)