Originally Posted By: Matter-eater Man
 Originally Posted By: the G-man of Zur-En-Arrh
 Originally Posted By: Matter-eater Man
 Originally Posted By: Pariah
Apparently you did since you just said you didn't necessarily think reform would help.


I said I didn't think a bill would be all wonderful or perfect. Recognizing that a bill isn't going to be flawless is hardly the same thing as "reform for reform sake".



You are advocating for what you admit is a flawed bill. So why rush it through?

Once a law is passed it normally takes another law to change or modify it. As we all know, passage of a law is a complicated and often time consuming process.

Therefore, once a flawed bill is passed the American people are likely stuck with it for the at least the foreseeable future?

Why not keep working at the bill until it is at least closer to "wonderful [and] perfect?"

Otherwise, aren't the Democrats essentially advocating "reform for reform's sake"?


No because taking more time only opens it up to what would probably be more of a flawed bill or no bill at all. That may please you politically g-man and your party but not America.


Given that the polls tend to be against the current bill, I'd say "America" is hardly pleased by "reform for reform's sake."

But, your love of polls aside, you are forgetting (or don't care about) the fact that the consideration, drafting and passage of legislation is SUPPOSED to be a deliberative and time consuming process. In fact, the founding fathers set up the entire "separation of powers" structure in part so that government couldn't ram through ill considered (or dangerous) laws that threaten the long term well being of the nation just because something was popular in the heat of the moment.