Post #13894 by sano on the US Policy board

Halls of Shrewd'm / US Policy

Unthreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (247)

Post New | Post Reply | Report Post | Recommend It!

No. of Recommendations: 5

I think the self cancel is in there because your side is fearful the emergency closure provision will work too well and the American people won't let you cancel it.

I doubt that fear is the motivation; maybe it's a sop to the few votes that would otherwise vote against the new bill, but more likely it allows the House to keep the issue on the front burner for the 2028 election year. If the bill works well, it will be a beneficial campaigning point for the proponents of extending the bill. If it isn't working well enough, it's an opportunity to modify the bill.

Also, it gives states an opportunity to push for modifications that serve their unique labor needs. This is particularly true for states in which agriculture is a major economic component.

There are scads of bills that have been passed and then modified over the last 75 years. Recently, for example:

https://newhouse.house.gov/sites/evo-subsites/newh...

Post New | Post Reply | Report Post | Recommend It!

Print the post

Unthreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (247)

Prev | Next

Announcements

US Policy FAQ

Contact Shrewd'm
Contact the developer of these message boards.

A community forum supporting civilized, and highly helpful, self-educating investors that come together for Shrewdness and merry spirits. These message boards closely follow the look and feel of the old message boards at boards.fool.com prior to the boards redirected to discussion.fool.com. Shrewd'm is not affiliated with the comprehensive and excellent investment website, The Motley Fool (TMF), in any way. The Shrewd commmunity here has owed, and continues to owe, gratitude to The Motley Fool for nurturing a culture of jovial irreverence towards Wall St, and that tradition will continue here.