Chris you're doing so much work (4.00 / 2)

Perhaps you should establish a way for us to help you track all this info?

I blog on InnermostParts.org

---

by: Sayhar @ Thu Jan 08, 2009 at 13:22:13 PM CST

I second that one (4.00 / 1)

perhaps split it up in the way that the Bush Dog reports were done?

---

by: Valatan @ Thu Jan 08, 2009 at 14:17:51 PM CST

[ Parent ]

My thoughts (4.00 / 1)

Bad bills?[...]  However, hypothetically speaking, if they are bad legislation, do we want to spend time trying to block bad bills in addition to pushing good ones?

My initial reaction was Of Course!  But you know, I'm kind of sick of being against stuff after all these years with Bush.  The idea of being for stuff seems much more exciting and unique.  I suggest we keep this positive.

Do we bother to track legislation that doesn't have any co-sponsors? If the member introducing the legislation hasn't made the effort to find supporters for his or her bill, should we?

I say yes, at least at first.  Lets experiment and see if we can have an impact on this kind of legislation before dismissing the idea.  We might not ever get it passed, but just bringing in more support has a positive impact.  (That whole, Overton Window thing.)

Should we bother to track legislation that is certain to be voted on by the full House, such as the Lilly Ledbettter bill (H.R. 11) or the D.C. voting rights bill (H.R. 157)? We might not be needed to track such high visibility legislation.

The broad answer is, of course, yes, but perhaps not for this project.

---

by: Mark Matson @ Thu Jan 08, 2009 at 13:27:39 PM CST

H.R. 33 (4.00 / 3)

Mike McIntyre's bill to eliminate the 5 month Disability waiting period. As a bipolar who is fortunately very treatable, I've met many people who aren't so lucky and so this resonates for me. I've met someone who'd been catatonic for 2 years and couldn't get on disability in a reasonable fashion upon coming out of the catatonia. This is not befitting a civilized society.

---

by: sb @ Thu Jan 08, 2009 at 13:29:37 PM CST

Ditto that (4.00 / 1)

I'm sponsoring an Iraqi refugee interpreter who took an IED in 2006 while providing protection for a state dept. employee. He arrived here in September and applied shortly thereafter. He has the same problem, I believe.

---

by: johnalive @ Thu Jan 08, 2009 at 14:55:47 PM CST

[ Parent ]

things jumped out at me (0.00 / 0)

HR 45 will probably be written in a draconian way

HR 59 is necessary

HR 188 good luck get through all those committees

HR 194 Go Pete Stark!

---

by: Bob Brigham @ Thu Jan 08, 2009 at 13:32:02 PM CST

Single Payer HR-676 (3.43 / 7)

Conyers' always makes sure to re-introduce the single payer bill HR-676 "Improved and Expanded Medicare for All" so it retains same number. Branding as part of the campaign. We have somewhere around 91 co-sponsors in House. Bernie Sanders of VT has said he will introduce a single payer senate bill. Merkley, Franken have said they would also support single payer in the Senate.  A few other new senators were HR-676 endorsers when they were in the House, as are some new House members. And of course Peter Stark has his variant HR-1200.

Main objective is to get single payer a seat at the discussion, and to not allow Baucus and others to keep it completely off the table.

Would like to get hearings in the House.
Would like to get CBO to do comparative mark-up/analysis.

For more info contacts on this see:

PNHP National: http://www.pnhp.org/
PNHP State & Local: http://www.pnhp.org/stateactions/

CNA/NNOC: http://www.guaranteedhealthcar...

Also: http://www.healthcare-now.org/

---

by: DrSteveB @ Thu Jan 08, 2009 at 13:38:15 PM CST

My thoughts (4.00 / 1)

1. Identify your favorites to get passed, based not on its likelihood of passage but rather its potential impact
2. Cast around to see if there is a political coalition that has taken that bill under its wing
3. If not, see if a coalition would be willing to make it a priority
4. Re-prioritize your favorites based on the results of 2) and 3)

This is a great idea.

---

by: TValley @ Thu Jan 08, 2009 at 13:40:25 PM CST

Where can actions have the greatest effect? (4.00 / 3)

Somewhat along the lines of what TValley is saying, can we identify which bills are orphans - languishing simple due to inertia, not because anybody opposes them.  In other words, Under-the-Radar bills that have a chance of passing but just need somebody advocating for them to get some attention.

---

by: dreaminonempty @ Thu Jan 08, 2009 at 13:56:24 PM CST

Prioritize & Strategize. (0.00 / 0)

We can't do everything, so I agree that we should figure out what is most important, rather than track everything. One way to prioritize would be paying closer attention to a few key issues, like healthcare reform, or the green economy. For our purposes we want to focus on things that define and solidify progressive values and legislators.

Sometimes the big bills and big issues don't provide enough fine tuning, or are too blunt of a litmus test. A relatively small bill is might be more informative, because there is less party line voting and it better highlights the difference between progressive and not-progressive.

Strategize

Here is a secondary question: What is the overlap between this Progressive Legislation Monitoring, and the PCCC? What bills would we focus on to elect more progressives?

---

by: MetaData @ Thu Jan 08, 2009 at 14:27:46 PM CST

[ Parent ]

I wouldn't ignore ALL Republican bills. (4.00 / 1)

in some cases, an outlier  Republican may agree to act as lead sponsor to  improve the chances to line up a few votes in their caucus, especially for what would otherwise be a polarizing hot-button.

First example I'm seeing is Roscoe Bartlett's HR 18, "To amend the Controlled Substances Act and the Controlled Substances Import and Export Act with respect to penalties for powder cocaine and crack cocaine offenses."



This is a Test of the Emergency Free Speech System. This is only a Test. In an actual Free Speech Emergency, I'll be locked up.

---

by: Ben Masel @ Thu Jan 08, 2009 at 14:03:40 PM CST

Bartlett had a good peak oil bill too (0.00 / 0)

Is there a benefit to reaching out to him? I know he was seriosuly challenged last time, but that was probably a one-time thing and I'd rather have him retiring after helping secure a lasting progressive legacy for America than blow him off and leave good bills to moulder.

Forgotten Countries - a foreign policy-focused blog

---

by: Englishlefty @ Thu Jan 08, 2009 at 20:05:33 PM CST

[ Parent ]

My thoughts (4.00 / 1)

I think we should only oppose bills that egregious. I wouldn't waste resources on small inside baseball type opposition.

I think bills without any co-sponsors should be left as orphans. We can't possibly resurrect a bill that the actual author doesn't take seriously.

I also think we should ignore bills big name bills like the Lilly Ledbetter bill and the D.C. voting rights bill. We should focus this effort where we can actually make a difference.


The truth about John McCain.

---

by: Jawis @ Thu Jan 08, 2009 at 14:04:47 PM CST

H.R.239 (4.00 / 4)

H.R.239 : To impose requirements with regard to border searches of digital electronic devices and digital storage media, and for other purposes.
Sponsor: Rep Engel, Eliot L. [NY-17] (introduced 1/7/2009)      Cosponsors (1) Ron Paul
Committees: House Judiciary; House Homeland Security
Latest Major Action: 1/7/2009 Referred to House committee. Status: Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on Homeland Security, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.



This is a Test of the Emergency Free Speech System. This is only a Test. In an actual Free Speech Emergency, I'll be locked up.

---

by: Ben Masel @ Thu Jan 08, 2009 at 14:46:18 PM CST

On Bad Bills (4.00 / 1)

It would certainly be useful to know about and oppose bad bills, especially just as they are getting under way.  So I'm for fining out more about Salazar's potentially bad bill.

---

by: kaleidescope @ Thu Jan 08, 2009 at 16:36:42 PM CST

Bridge-Building To Be Effective (4.00 / 1)

I think that whatever strategy we adopt, we should be thinking about who's out there to work with.

This doesn't just mean who's out there as progressive issue groups in DC, but also who the members are on the committees, and who's out there in their districts that can lobby them as well.  So it makes sense to learn more about who the committee members are, which ones can be shifted, and how.

"Senate passes expanded GI bill despite Bush, McCain opposition"

---

by: Paul Rosenberg @ Thu Jan 08, 2009 at 16:38:57 PM CST

Salazar's bill isn't necessarily a bad idea (0.00 / 0)

depending on what it actually says (no text available yet). For example, I've long thought that explicitly exempting family-owned and -operated farms (and other family businesses) of a specific, modest size from estate taxes might be a good progressive idea, because it would take away the strongest argument against higher estate tax rates.

The right law along these lines would make it possible to then raise tax rates on heirs to vast fortunes (a relatively unpopular crowd) without unfairly slamming the (more politically sympathetic) people who hope to inherit a family-run business or farm that is the family's primary source of income. Thus, we simultaneously raise revenue and fight the growth of a hereditary aristocracy.

Again, I have no idea if Salazar's bill moves in the right direction or not, but we should certainly carefully consider the implications of any piece of legislation in comments before we decide what actions to take.

---

by: FearItself @ Thu Jan 08, 2009 at 17:30:19 PM CST

This is a fantastic project, (0.00 / 0)

and the sort of thing that makes Open Left truly useful. Some thoughts on the questions here:

How many can we do at once?

Would it make sense to start the project small and ramp up if it turns out there is sufficient resources to do more?

Bad bills?

I personally tend to agree with Jawis that bad bills should, at the least, have a much higher "significance" threshold than good bills. If nothing else, won't it sometimes be the case that bad bills are moved forward as horse-trading in order to get someone on board with a good bill?

Do we bother to track legislation that doesn't have any co-sponsors?

It seems like it shouldn't be a hard and fast rule, since there may be valid reasons for a lack of co-sponsors? For example, notice that there is one single bill that currently fits both the "certain to go up for a vote" excessive-importance criteria and the "no co-sponsors" unimportance criteria (DC voting rights).

By the way, this one jumped out at me:

37. H.R.37 : To establish a systematic mortgage modification program at the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, and for other purposes.
Sponsor: Rep Waters, Maxine [CA-35]

---

by: mcc @ Thu Jan 08, 2009 at 18:58:06 PM CST

Also, a stupid question: (4.00 / 1)

Something that jumps out at me looking over the list of introduced legislation is how many truly big-ticket items aren't on here. There are exactly zero gay rights related bills, not even the bills from last session which are known to be passable are present. There is no stem cell research bill, which one would assume is the most obvious easy-to-pass no-brainer "on Obama's desk after the inauguration" bill you could think of. EFCA is absent, as is any part of Obama's health care plan. What exactly does this mean? Are these big items absent because they're what those "reserved for the speaker" items are? Are they absent because they're waiting for something to happen (Obama is sworn in, the stimulus bill is completed) before introducing them? Are they absent because they're off the table for this legislative session?

---

by: mcc @ Thu Jan 08, 2009 at 19:31:33 PM CST

I'm looking through the bills (4.00 / 1)

and I am thinking how great it would be if there was a little drop down menu next to each one where you could give it a rating, like you can do with a blog comment.  Not to minimize the huge amount of work you did to put that list together, but if you want feedback something like that would definitely give you more.

If you live on Chicago's north side, get involved in Northside DFA.
www.northsidedfa.com

---

by: yoda @ Fri Jan 09, 2009 at 06:11:12 AM CST

these jump out (0.00 / 0)

Okay, I took a quick look and the following bills jump out.  Of course as you say we really don't know what the bills say so who knows:

Bills with some co-sponsors:

97. H.R.97 : To amend title 18, United States Code, to prohibit certain deceptive practices in Federal elections, and for other purposes.

111. H.R.111 : To amend the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 and the Revised Statutes of the United States to prohibit financial holding companies and national banks
from engaging, directly or indirectly, in real estate brokerage or real estate management activities, and for other purposes.

158. hr 158 To amend the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to provide for expenditure limitations and public financing for House of Representatives general elections, and for other purposes.

Bills with no co-sponsors:

69. H.R.69 : To reform the provisions requiring "one-strike" eviction from public and federally assisted housing.

168. H.R.168 : To authorize 150,000 incremental vouchers for tenant-based rental assistance under section 8 of the United States Housing Act of 1937 to help meet the housing needs of low-income families.

190. H.R.190 : To amend title 38, United States Code, to ensure that veterans in each of the 48 contiguous States are able to receive services in at least one full-service hospital of the Veterans Health Administration in the State or receive comparable services provided by contract in the State.

178. H.R.178 : To authorize the appropriation of funds to be used to recruit, hire, and train 100,000 new classroom paraprofessionals in order to improve educational
achievement for children.

If you live on Chicago's north side, get involved in Northside DFA.
www.northsidedfa.com

---

by: yoda @ Fri Jan 09, 2009 at 06:45:19 AM CST