NDAA Public Law 112-81 censored from the public; Is this a Coverup?

I did a search, and found nothing on the subject. But, I've tried before and failed. So lets see if this has been posted.

uswgo.com...

Coincidence?

reply to post by sting130u
well it is listed in the archives www.archives.gov... from the link

H.R. 1540 / Public Law 112-81
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 (Dec. 31, 2011; 125 Stat. 1298; 565 pages)

and a few mouse clicks www.gpo.gov... from the link

PUBLIC LAW 112–81—DEC. 31, 2011

i do not see any thing funny or odd about the old page not working it was up dated ,seems some one did not get the memo , or did not visit the web site that often, enjoy reading NDAA2012 in full

reply to post by bekod


thx

reply to post by sting130u

Which version do you want? The bill as introduced in the House? Reported in the House? Passed by the House? Referred to the Senate? Passed by the Senate? Public print? The enrolled bill? The slip law?

I can offer an explanation. This is not the first time - by a long shot - that a major appropriation bill has been delayed in having its final text made public.

Long and detailed appropriations bill like this are subjected to an enormous number of last-minute amendments; some changes in amounts here and there, the addition of some favorite project, the deletion of something -- often several changes on every printed page of the proposed bill. These amendments are so numerous and come so late in the process that, instead of Congress printing and reprinting the proposal with all these amendments set in type, there is one copy (usually the Speaker's copy) that is carefully marked up by hand to show all these changes, and then the votes are on the text in the Speaker's copy. This frequently means that the members themselves are voting without seeing all the latest changes on paper, because very few of them could manage to mark up their own copies quite so thoroughly.

Anyway it's the Speaker's copy that get voted on, the Speaker signs it, it goes to the Senate, it (with all its handwritten changes) gets voted on there, and the Speaker's copy is signed again by the Senate President, and then it goes to the White House for the President's signature on the marked up Speaker's copy. It is this one copy with all the handwritten changes that is the official text.

Most bills in Congress get much fewer amendments, especially at the last minute, so typeset versions of up-to-date texts can easily be worked up and printed for all the members and then the typeset version can be rushed over to the Govt Printing Office to be printed up in Statutes at Large and the like. But with an appropriations bill with all those handwritten changes on the Speaker's copy, the typesetting of the final text has to be done very laboriously, using the Speaker's copy and examining every line on every page to look for any changes and then work up a new typeset version from it or change the last typeset version being very careful to include every handwritten change. It's a very time-consuming process.

The result is that some early publications of the enacted text - as in the monthly paperback booklets issued by West's US Code Congressional & Administrative News and Lexis's US Code Service Legislative Updates - are photocopies of the marked up Speaker's copy with the handwritten notations. ..... But the final, neatly done, typeset versions arrive much much later, often after a delay of more than a month.

reply to post by Shoonra
well sort of, the GPO went and did a up grade to their web site back in Jan just after the NDAA2012, to fuel the fire of the conspiracy , so one would say "oh look, it not their " but yes it is just look for the new "GPO" search on the main page, hint you have too know the full text of the bill typing in NDAA2012 would be of no use see my post above or here www.gpo.gov... from the link

FDsys:
GPO's Federal Digital System

click on that and that would be the new search for bills, laws, and publications my bad,it does find the NDA2012 www.gpo.gov...