Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : Steve's Channelling Thread -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Logain Ablar who wrote (8145)	11/22/2000 7:30:42 PM
From: Bosco	Respond to of 30051

<ot>Hi Tim - thanks for sharing that experience. My guess is that similar cases happen in other states. In fact, when I was part of the consulting team hired to work on a grandiose design [so I was young and foolish :)!] of a welfare system back in the mid 80s, legislative approval of my resume was required. I doubt the legislators had time to worry about peon like me but they probably rubberstamped it based on the project mgr's recommendation. So I tend to agree with you about certain bills and/or legislative formality. However, I think this manual count bill in Texas is a much bigger deal. To say the least, it impacts the legislators and other elected officials. Like the outlawing of butterfly ballots in NH and MA [and other states I don't know of,] this kind of bills don't come about b/c the legislators are mighty bored <G>! I mean, no matter how we think of politicians, they are very busy pros. Fund raising, dealing with constituents, jockeying for positions, doing what they believe in or advancing their agenda, etc etc. So, you are absolutely right about them rubberstamping minor bills based on their aides' recommendation. You know, their aides may say, "Senator, ABC Ins, Inc needs this bill. Chairman so-and-so is your supporter. And I don't see any major opposition. You should support it." Not so with an internal bill like this. This is not from industry groups. From constituents? Unlikely. My point is that I cannot see this is one of those fly-below -the-radar bill. This is from the legislature perspective. But I cannot see the executive branch will ignore it either. I mean, this has a serious impact on all elected officials, all the way up to the Gov and Lt Gov. I would feel better if Gov Bush had to trade with the devil, even if he didn't like it. I would be concerned if he simple rubberstamped such a crucial bill --- crucial not in the regular Joe's [and Jane's :)] eyes but from his own perspective. best, Bosco