KAS Political Stance
KAS Political Stance
Jobs, Bills, Employment, Policy
Kevin A. Sensenig | November 30, 2014
Jobs / Bills / Employment / Policy
Marx says (in the Communist Manifesto) that the small manufacturer, the shopkeeper, and the artisan are _conservative_.
Marx says that the proletariat are the revolutionaries.
What he writes further is very interesting.
The Republican majority United States House Of Representatives has passed maybe 370 bills since maybe 2012, 46 of which they claim pertain directly to jobs.
From the Speaker’s Office
At Least 46 Jobs Bills #StuckInTheSenate
I may not agree with all the bills or their specifics. I haven’t had the time to study them.
I studied 1 bill that defined additional and revised policy concerning state/federal forest in Washington or Oregon State. It seemed to strengthen the definition of certain mountains or forests as a strong type of federal wilderness land. It seemed to allow flexibility for private land to manage as timber/forest/woodlands. (I might strengthen parameters, or not.) It seemed to strengthen protections on either side of certain lengths of specific rivers and streams. (I might have made the protected width 1 mile rather than 1/4 mile, or not.) In the bill, there was a semantic definition for the term ‘environmental document’ that I’d work with; I’d introduce a term ‘environmental ontology document’ to mean, descriptive documents that describes the domain, the environment, the “what it is, that which is before you” as a thing or being of-nature, including sometimes mention of relevant human activity or participation; and ‘environmental risk document’ and ‘environment legal studies document’ and ‘environmental assessment document’ as separate categories.
I’d like to study and discuss this bill further, as an example of subtype progressive thought within an already aware bill. If I understand the bill correctly, the suggestions I made fit within its framework, and I’m not sure they simply are to strengthen the intent of the bill. Yet the bill may be perfectly fine the way it is, except I’d say the additional term ‘environmental ontology document’.
It is clear that the Republicans are putting forth serious effort to get some things done, and to work with an awareness and reason that should be studied.
But...Senator Harry Reid #StuckInTheSenate.
United States Senator Reid has had every opportunity to edit, suggest options are opinion, revise, approve, simply submit to the Senate for consideration and, per debate, the vote, by the US Senate, all the Senators. During this debate, and optional edit, I might suggest negotiations. I understand the role of committees in negating ideas that simply don’t work out, or studying policy until the right answer is found, in consultation among the Senators, or with the constituents, legislatures, and governors from the various States.
It seems though the 370 or 46 bills #StuckInTheSenate is _not_ the above paragraph, given the serious minded effort the Republicans in the House have put forth. It is dedicated.
These bills should be studied on their merit, suggestions for improvement or correction given, and then these bills should be material for debate, definition, and negotiations, to an integrated product, the bill, or not.