Forum Post: Provide layman annotations to Senate and Congressional bills under consideration
Posted 12 years ago on Dec. 10, 2011, 9:38 a.m. EST by Hambil
(32)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
A website, a few lawyers, and all bills actively under consideration could be summerized and annotated with layman terms, making their intent and content clear to everyone.
This could be a huge step for transparency. I would also suggest the site be heavily geared toward being used as a feeder source for other sites. (easy to link, quote, rss, etc.)
Laws written in plain English, by reasonable persons and upheld in only Article III common law or Constitutional Courts. Translating "legalese" only leads to misinterpretations. I'm even in favor of limiting our government writing to only words found in the 1828 dictionary and no later versions.
Even legal experts OFTEN disagree with the miles of legalese of which most congressional and senate bills consist. It was never supposed to be this way. Plain English and common law for all.
Fine, then provide a he-said, she-said. Have different interpretations, as long as they are in words I can understand.
Wipe it all clean back to 1861 and start over.
I understand and respect your beliefs. However, they do not solve the immediate problem that I cannot understand the laws our government is creating, and they are creating laws that allows for things like the indefinite detainment of US Citizens without a trial.
Baby steps. I respect your desires, and your passion, work with me and don't derail mine :since you've already said it's a good idea )
http://occupynashville.org/forum/index.php?topic=1065.0
Here is a solution for that. It's time to get the red ass about it all.
Sadly I think that effort is misguided, for the exact reasons stated in my original op. My analysis of the bill (with some legal help) resulted in finding this section (which may have been added in the round of talks that made the bill a headline to start with):
(1) UNITED STATES CITIZENS.—The requirement to detain a person in military custody under this section does not extend to citizens of the United States. (2) LAWFUL RESIDENT ALIENS.—The requirement to detain a person in military custody under this section does not extend to a lawful resident alien of the United States on the basis of conduct taking place within the United States, except to the extent permitted by the Constitution of the United States.
I still hate the law, and the Patriot Act, and want them gone, but that's another discussion.
This discussion is about making the laws currently being considered more understandable and accessible to the general public. This can be done now.
yes but, that language was subjegated by other language found elsewhere, research Harvard Law Review's opinion as well as the vids of various Dual National Israeli Loyalist Senators who allegedly co-wrote and sponsored the bill.
Bullshit! The original 13th amendment addressed this systemic and cancerous problem, explicitly. Our nation was originally intended to be governed and run by mere 'reasonable persons', not attorneys and other forms of nobility.
It makes sense that the people's government should be run by reasonable persons, NOT LEGAL experts and such, and that said government should not extend those same bounds.
One of the powers of congress defined in the constitution is "To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof."
Making laws, means lawyers. I don't really see a way around that - the world is complex. Attempting to make dramatic changes to our system of law while attempting to make dramatic changes to the branches of government it is designed to be a check and balance against, is not a good strategy.
Like it or not, at the moment the law is our friend, and I'd kind of like to know what's going on without having to go back to school for 4+ years.
Lawyers and Attorneys using courts with sanctioned jurisdiction to pervert common sense and strip human rights, not common law or Article III courts.
Huge difference.
I do not claim to know the difference, but I am excited that you do. Please, explain.
Jump in the thread on the link BofL posted. More than you ever wanted to know and perhaps you too will be equally filled with more questions. I study it often and the search for a simple solution other than wiping it all clean back to 1861. I think I'll invite Lawrence Lessig to contribute to that thread.
Very long thread. I do not think that all current political models are a construct of the %1. I think most started with sincerity, and got corrupted by the %1. So to me, saying we have to toss it all out and start over, is no different then saying we have to toss out the influence. Once the %1 lose undue influence any system within reason can work - in my opinion. They all have valid arguments for and against. But none have ever been allowed to run without significant interference from big money elite.
Sure, the pattern is old, but what solves it isn't (in my opinion) states rights, or more or less government. What solves it is what attracted to me to this movement in the first place - social media, technology, phones with cameras. Transparency and vigilance are our greatest weapons.
Keep the current system, but fight to shine a bright light on all corners of it, and keep that light there. Whatever that takes - be it constitutional changes or creation of a World Wide Government Watchdog Agency or whatever other creative solutions people can come up with.
Evil cannot exist in the light. Even when it seems to be walking in the light, it's hiding under something.
There are two systems currently coexisting.
If only people would study the original 13th amendment and work forward (and backward) through history... It would let them see what went wrong, and where our focus should be in repairing our Republic.
Agreed. Looks like an uphill battle.
It's a long battle. I realized after the first incident of serious violence (that I know of - the specifics are not the point), which I watched live via livestream, that this was a civil rights battle. A decade long battle. I realized the mantle was being passed from those on the streets, to those in their houses and apartments. That we needed to wake up and Occupy our lives, and we needed to do it now.
We will take this fight to the courts, the public, the offices of government. I can not promise the solutions will be immediate and dramatic as many wish, but I do hope change is recognized and supported.
The burden has gotten heavy, and things are set to get far uglier than perhaps the young (no offense, please - I love all of you) may realize. So, it saddens me. But, it has to be done.
So yes, and uphill battle. But it's already started. The call to arms has been made. People showed up. All we can do now is fight until we win.
Thank you, Hambil! Your words resonate in TRUTH. Please visit http://occupywallst.org/forum/interesting-read-about-the-constitution-and-corpor/ I believe you will appreciate the discussion and valuable links within.
When you like a reply, hit the like button. ;-)
http://www.barefootsworld.net/consti12.html#167-1 for those unfamiliar with the original 13th and it's significance.
Okay, so I read this. Now, please, very clearly outline your position. Because this entire things is wrapped up in slavery and I want no part of some white power thing. So if that is not your intent, make it very clear what is and pull no punches please.
Thank you so much for the opportunity-I'm at work, applying my white power. Just kidding-absolutely NOT related whatsoever. Once off work, I'll revise to answer your question.
Learn history http://occupywallst.org/forum/interesting-read-about-the-constitution-and-corpor/
why they don't do this should become clearer
I am suggesting we do it.
I read your thread. I have no love for banks. I do not believe our entire system (government anyway) needs to be tossed/overthrown. I also don't really see the relevance to my OP, other than 'we are being used', and well, duh.
What I am suggesting is that we provide insight into current bills under consideration and likely to come to a vote (or non-vote, as the Senate currently 'works'). Thus, providing timely feedback right to peoples inboxs or wherever they want it, on what the laws that could be about to take effect actually mean.
As suggestions go-yours is a good one. I believe the historic fiat hegemony is of utmost relevance to all the (relevant) problems posted... Congress are literally the trustees of the hidden bankruptcy of the 1930s. The organic Constitution provides everything this country needs to be healthy wealthy and wise. Law has been usurped by the central banks. The law is still there, is still often used effectively as defense, but they (unconstitutional article iv courts) don't publish those cases because it goes against precedent. There are two systems IN PLAY. People are tricked into believing their constitutional rights no longer apply-when they don't understand their status relative to The Federal Zone. Best place to learn these principles is the Supreme Law Library- www.supremelaw.org As you, I know for certain overthrow is the wrong move-will just usher swifter mob rule/military rule.
Amen, that is the gospel!