On Sat, 03 Oct 2009 15:16:18 -0400, Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:

On Sat, 03 Oct 2009 13:31:57 -0500, thunder
wrote:

On Sat, 03 Oct 2009 08:30:04 -0400, Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:

do any of you really think that we need a healthcare bill that the
people in charge of producing don't understand?

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/54930

Seriously?

Is it surprising? They are writing laws. Plain English is too vague
and filled with too many contradictions. Hell, a misplaced comma can
change the whole meaning, providing loopholes. Most professions have
their own language. I'm sure you have read scientific articles.
Understandable? Only to another scientist, maybe.

Well, that's a good point - I agree to some extent. Some of the stuff I
read looks like worm scratchings to most, but it's understandable to me.
:)

My larger point, and I think it's an important one, is this. We pay the
legislators to write laws. Almost all of them are lawyers. If the
lawyers who write the legislation don't understand the legalesse that
they themselves are responsible for understanding, then what's the
point?

They definitely should understand the law, and what it contains, but I'm
not sure they need to understand the legalese. Although, it would be a
plus if they did. They have hired help, staff, to do the grunt work, if
you will. Personally, I don't see the big deal. Many businessmen don't
understand accounting. That's why we have accountants. Builders don't
need to be architects, etc. etc.

When I fill in at UCONN, the people that hire me expect me to understand
the subject I'm instructing and be able to impart that information to
the students clearly and precisely.

Shouldn't we expect our legislators to do the same?

Personally, I would prefer our legislators to reflect our society. I
think it would be a good thing if there were fewer lawyers in Congress.

An alternative would be to make all laws understandable in plain
English. However, given our 200 plus years of precedents, I don't see
that happening. Given the controversy over the meaning of the word "is",
plain English probably is unworkable in law.