Behold: The (Blank) Act of (Blankety-Blankety-Blank-Blank)

White House photo/<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/whitehouse/3484010807/">Pete Souza</a> (<a href="http://www.usa.gov/copyright.shtml">Government Work</a>).

For indispensable reporting on the coronavirus crisis, the election, and more, subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily newsletter.

Bills change a lot on the way to becoming a law. Their contents change as members of the House and Senate push pet provisions. They get longer (or shorter) and more (or less) expensive. Even their names change. Sometimes, that can lead to mistakes. Take House Resolution (HR) 1586, a bill originally intended to modernize the air traffic control system (and reauthorize the Federal Aviation Administration). In August, the Senate gutted the bill and used the HR number as a vehicle to provide money to save teacher jobs and Medicaid aid for the states. There’s just one problem: somewhere along the way, the bill lost its name. That’s right: the teacher jobs bill (as passed by the House and the Senate and enrolled for the president to sign) is called the “XXXXXXAct ofXXXX.” And they didn’t just make the mistake once. They made it twice. There are two substitute amendments to the bill with blank-blankety-blankety-blank names. 

Sure, the important thing is that states got money to save teacher jobs and close budget gaps. But it’s still funny that Congress doesn’t even bother to name its bills anymore. And no one seems to care. After all, this isn’t a secret. It’s in the congressional record. It’s possible that a change was made after the bill was passed and sent to the president (a procedure known as an “enrollment correction”). I’ve asked the Government Printing Office for a copy of the bill signed by the president to see if that happened. But if that wasn’t done, the president himself had to have seen the funny name when he signed the bill on August 10. It’s right at the top:

SHORT TITLE

Section 1. This Act may be cited as the `XXXXXXAct ofXXXX’.

Here’s a screengrab:

Check all this out for yourself in THOMAS, the Library of Congress’ congressional database. Here’s the timeline. Here’s the list of versions of the bill. And here’s the bill itself, as passed by the House and Senate and enrolled for the President’s signature. Read it and weep.

DOES IT FEEL LIKE POLITICS IS AT A BREAKING POINT?

Headshot of Editor in Chief of Mother Jones, Clara Jeffery

It sure feels that way to me, and here at Mother Jones, we’ve been thinking a lot about what journalism needs to do differently, and how we can have the biggest impact.

We kept coming back to one word: corruption. Democracy and the rule of law being undermined by those with wealth and power for their own gain. So we're launching an ambitious Mother Jones Corruption Project to do deep, time-intensive reporting on systemic corruption, and asking the MoJo community to help crowdfund it.

We aim to hire, build a team, and give them the time and space needed to understand how we got here and how we might get out. We want to dig into the forces and decisions that have allowed massive conflicts of interest, influence peddling, and win-at-all-costs politics to flourish.

It's unlike anything we've done, and we have seed funding to get started, but we're looking to raise $500,000 from readers by July when we'll be making key budgeting decisions—and the more resources we have by then, the deeper we can dig. If our plan sounds good to you, please help kickstart it with a tax-deductible donation today.

Thanks for reading—whether or not you can pitch in today, or ever, I'm glad you're with us.

Signed by Clara Jeffery

Clara Jeffery, Editor-in-Chief

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest