Originally posted by fraterormus
Just because an official gave a "nay" vote, doesn't mean that they advocate the opposite.
A conscientious voter will do as our elected officials will do.
There are issues that I whole-heartedly agree with, but when they come up for vote, I sometimes vote against them.
Why?
Because sometimes legislation is too vague, or too poorly written, allowing for it to be abused.
Sometimes legislation is too broad, containing too many riders.
Sometimes legislation is written in such a way that it makes it legally contestable as unconstitutional.
Sometimes legislation makes too severe of demands unto being unreasonable upon certain demographics, despite it being for a good reason.
I may support the spirit of the legislation, but in good conscience I can't always vote for that legislation and may give a "Nay".
A "Nay" Vote can sometimes mean, "I agree, but not as it is worded now. Send it back to the drawing board and write a better thought out
draft and I'll reconsider because I do agree with what you are trying to do, just not with how you are wording it."
[edit on 19-10-2009 by fraterormus]
and sometimes legislation is clear and concise - saying no federal funding to companies who allow these clauses in their contracts
like in this case
and if you vote against it - you advocate gang rape.
Very few times can this so easily be sumarized
but in this case, it can.
if you disagree with me - you can clearly read the proposed amendment by clicking
here
and as for their responses?
They didnt condone it by saying "too flaky of legislation"
no - they condoned it by saying govt shouldnt be allowed to tell private business what to do
|
