Did Johnson’s procedural demand that the bill be read aloud actually enhance familiarity with its contents? If they were only becoming familiar with legislation when read out loud shortly before the vote, they’d likely be less informed, not more. But generally speaking, the density and intricacy of the legislation itself defies the actual utility in reading it directly. To put a very fine point on it: It is good for the public to know and understand what complex legislation does. But Johnson’s procedural maneuver was not that sort of effort, one legitimately aimed at informing the public about the bill’s contents.

Source: Washington Post March 05, 2021 21:29 UTC