Best.Bill.Ever: The Restrain Steve King From Legislating Act Of 2015

Just when you thought that Congress was an utterly dysfunctional institution that couldn’t get anything done, Colorado representative Jared Polis introduces legislation that may be the precursor of a truly productive era of government.

Restrain Steve King

The “Restrain Steve King From Legislating Act” is a brilliant legal maneuver that has the potential of making Congress a more rational and deliberative body. The bill’s language is simple and direct, as described by Polis on his House website:

“For too long, Steve King has overstepped his constitutionally nonexistent judicial authority,” Polis said. “Mr. King has perverted the Constitution to create rights to things such as discrimination, bullying, and disparate treatment. These efforts to enshrine these appalling values as constitutional rights were not envisioned by the voters, or by King’s colleagues who must currently try to restrain his attempts to single-handedly rewrite the nation’s founding principles on a bill-by-bill basis.

“I urge the House to bring this bill to the floor. If passed, my bill would preserve the right of millions of voters in all 50 states who would prefer that Steve King refrain from legislating a role for himself in their marriage decisions.”

In case you haven’t figured it out yet, the Polis bill is a satirical swipe at an actual bill by King that seeks to prohibit the judiciary from ruling on the constitutionality of marriage equality and/or bans of such. Polis used King’s own wording as the basis for his mock bill.

Polis is distinguishing himself as a Congressman with a biting sense of humor that he employs deftly on matters of very real importance. A few years ago, after the GOP introduced what they called the “Energy Tax Prevention Act of 2011,” a bill that would have the effect of prohibiting the Environmental Protection Agency from protecting the environment, Polis countered with an amendment to change the title of the bill to “The Dirty Air Act of 2011.” His colleague, Rep. Gerry Connelly, joined in with a similar amendment proposing a title change to “The Koch Brothers Appreciation Act.”

As if it weren’t funny enough to put forward a bill telling King to STFU, the blockheads at Breitbart News actually took it seriously. They posted an article with the epically over-the-top headline “Big Gay Hate Machine Attempts To Take Over Congress.” It appears they were just shooting for something patently offensive that has no relationship to the actual topic. BreitBrat Matthew Boyle accused Polis of “introduc[ing] a bill aimed at silencing King and stripping him of his power—something the Constitution wouldn’t allow him to do anyway.” Nowhere in the article does he recognize that Polis’ bill is satirical, however he does veer off into homophobic rants on other unrelated subjects.

News Corpse Presents: The ALL NEW 2nd volume of
Fox Nation vs. Reality: The Fox News Cult of Ignorance.
Available now at Amazon.

It’s too bad that Polis’ bill won’t ever get a vote. There’s a pretty good chance it would pass with the help of some of King’s fellow Republicans who are embarrassed by his puerile antics and Tea Party dementia. President Obama, however, would likely veto it for purely political reasons. After all, it helps him to have a maniacal voice in Congress who opposes the Violence Against Women Act, advocates violence against animals, voted against aid to New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina, compared immigrants to livestock as he proposed an electrified border fence, and praised disgraced, blacklisting senator Joe McCarthy as a great American hero. And there’s the problem with the bill Polis is offering. Allowing King to speak as much as he wants will assure many more Democratic victories in the future.

Advertisement:

10 thoughts on “Best.Bill.Ever: The Restrain Steve King From Legislating Act Of 2015

  1. Sounds like a good idea – I’d vote for it. Anybody propose a “Get Rid of the Bonehead” bill yet? Of course, such a bill might be too broad – there are so many options, right?

    You see, the problem with the Congress is they don’t need brains to live, constantly prove this point, and have to wait for the Breitbrats’ moral outrage before they do anything. Or is it instructions from Lord Rush of Limburger or Jabba the Hutt? I get confused sometimes…. 🙂

  2. Why is it considered satirical? Seem to me it should be considered deadly serious, and put to an up or down vote in the House.Most likely the Senate would also approve it, and clearly the President would sign it.

    I’d suggest adding Louie Gommert’s name to the bill, also.

    Gene

  3. Humor in politics… is that really a thing?

  4. “Subsidizing big polluters — including some of the world’s wealthiest corporations — amounts to paying them to poison the water we drink and the air we breathe. Unfortunately, fossil fuel companies are some of the wealthiest and most powerful in Washington. Influence peddling is how they got these subsidies in the first place, and they are willing to use their cash and connections to keep the money flowing.”“How many of you right now have bottled water at you computer, we lost our water a long time ago and it is unfit to drink,,,How many of you have a “quick acting inhaler nearby??? We are losing our air too,,,,WHY?? CORPORATE AMERICA POLUTION,,, it is that simple and yet they do not want to pay for destroying eco system after eco system that we have to pay to clean up,,,,,,a carbon tax is the most simple way to make them pay up for the damage they do to the earth,,,,,”

    • Daniel Guillot – Bullshit – throwing a few of these CEOs in jail would go a lot further – a carbon tax only allows them to pay for the privilege of polluting. Polluting isn’t really something that should be legal – purposely injuring people is something anyone would balk at – including conservatives. Stop looking for money and get to the problem – our government isn’t ours anymore, so looking for something like carbon taxes imposed by government would just put the burden on the taxpayer in the end – and you know it. And those dollars you think will fix the problem will go to some other special interest, just as they all do now.

    • Just to be clear CO2 isn’t a pollutant in my book – an overproduction of it can and may be causing negative impacts on the environment but it’s not itself a pollutant.
      Money isn’t an issue to someone when it’s not their own personal money or property at stake – so a carbon tax won’t matter. You and I will end up subsidizing the tax – as I noted previously.

      • Slightly off topic, but okay.

        Actually, CO2 does cause “negative impacts” on the government. Some CO2 is good for the environment – it helps keep us from freezing in the winter. Too much is Venus. The right wing nuts apparently would prefer this…

        • I didn’t create this line of comment – just responding. We seem to agree – in an of itself – CO2 is NOT a pollutant – in quantities that the environment cannot process – it can be bad. The opening comment used the word polluters – but I’m not sure how most people define that so I thought I would clarify my definition. I’m sure there is an engineering solution – it will take a real leader to actually move us toward a solution.

Comments are closed.