Dirtroad Posted June 29, 2009 Share Posted June 29, 2009 Have you read about this.... the bill that passed the House on Friday has an amendment that will make it a law that when I sell my house, a federal gov't inspector must come in and approve my home.... do I have all the current appliances that are energy efficient. HELLO? Why in the world would I buy a new stove or washer until my current one is broken/dead? This is beyond green trees & clean air. Plus, I am still fuming that NO ONE is reading this bill before they vote. Ihope more Senators can read b/c the House appears to be too busy, to arrogant, or to illiterate to manage it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
i.love.lucy Posted June 29, 2009 Share Posted June 29, 2009 This might be what I have been hearing about around here. I have a friend who is a home inspector and he is wanting to help another friend who has been out of work for 6 months start a business doing this. It's some kind of Green Energy inspection thing. My understanding is that certain homes are exempt - homes newer than 15 years or so, homes being sold due to divorce, and distressed sales. My guess is it's just like with cars, Cash for Clunkers, but you can't regulate that you get old, and non-energy efficient homes off the grid. All you can do is work harder to improve their efficiency. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pqr Posted June 29, 2009 Share Posted June 29, 2009 Link please. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PineFarmMom Posted June 29, 2009 Share Posted June 29, 2009 Have you read about this.... the bill that passed the House on Friday has an amendment that will make it a law that when I sell my house, a federal gov't inspector must come in and approve my home.... do I have all the current appliances that are energy efficient. HELLO? Why in the world would I buy a new stove or washer until my current one is broken/dead? This is beyond green trees & clean air. Plus, I am still fuming that NO ONE is reading this bill before they vote. Ihope more Senators can read b/c the House appears to be too busy, to arrogant, or to illiterate to manage it. It is beyond ridiculous how we are regularly being robbed these days. The fact that they didn't read it I had heard, and I'm just so angry about how something that they have no idea the wording of and have no time to read can be stuck out there and passed over the weekend like that. I don't really see how this type thing can be forced on us for much longer without people rising up and fighting back! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cricket Posted June 29, 2009 Share Posted June 29, 2009 Link please. Yes, link please. I googled but didn't find anything. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Virginia Dawn Posted June 29, 2009 Share Posted June 29, 2009 (edited) It might be this bill: http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h111-2454 I couldn't access the amendments. Here is the only thing I could find: http://forums.hsn.com/hsn_postst12813_Reading-the-Waxman-Bill-Amendments.aspx It mentions reporting this on c-span. If any one finds out anything else, could they post it? Edited June 29, 2009 by Virginia Dawn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OHGrandma Posted June 29, 2009 Share Posted June 29, 2009 http://energycommerce.house.gov/Press_111/20090623/hr2454_rulesfiled.pdf page 296, titled, TITLE II—ENERGY EFFICIENCY 8 Subtitle A—Building Energy 9 Efficiency Programs There appears to be wording in the bill that would support what Dirtroad has reported. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soph the vet Posted June 29, 2009 Share Posted June 29, 2009 I watched the debate on HR2454 on CSPAN for over 2 hours on Friday. Horrible bill and what Dirtroad reported is just the tip of the iceberg. Thankfully there is supposedly a criminal investigation(heard it on the radio) that is going to happen of the EPA burying research that refutes their theory of carbon emissions having an effect on climate....so the fat lady hasn't sung on this one yet. And if that doesn't pan out it better die in the Senate. Call your Senators now!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stripe Posted June 29, 2009 Share Posted June 29, 2009 a federal gov't inspector must come in and approve my home.... do I have all the current appliances that are energy efficient. HELLO? Why in the world would I buy a new stove or washer until my current one is broken/dead? Sell your house without so many appliances. I see no reason a new home must come complete with a frig and washing machine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lisasaysto Posted June 29, 2009 Share Posted June 29, 2009 Sell your house without so many appliances. I see no reason a new home must come complete with a frig and washing machine. My stove, oven and dishwasher are built in. I haven't had a chance to read the bill yet, but I plan to. Would it also address hot water heaters and central air conditioners? Those can't be moved. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mommyof4ks Posted June 29, 2009 Share Posted June 29, 2009 YUCK! I so wish this had been passed about 6 weeks ago LOL! The house we bought is 25 yrs old and all appliances are original and in need of replacing. Not that I want the gov't messing in my business, but this would have been nice! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Melissa in FL Posted June 29, 2009 Share Posted June 29, 2009 My stove, oven and dishwasher are built in. I haven't had a chance to read the bill yet, but I plan to. Would it also address hot water heaters and central air conditioners? Those can't be moved. Yes, and my understanding is it would also include: having enough insulation in your attic, Having a certain "graded" roof, how weather proof your windows are, and things like hurricane protection garage doors if you are in an area that's a concern. I also understand that a lot of this is in an amendment? I'm still trying to find more than rumor. Melissa Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirtroad Posted June 29, 2009 Author Share Posted June 29, 2009 (edited) I heard it on a radio discussion NOT internet news. Sorry. It was being read on the house floor last week in what some politicians tried to call a filibuster... imagine... someone actually trying to get the contents of a bill into the public arena is a filibuster. This a shameful house of Tyrants. It is part of the Waxman bill. You know I am sorry. It is none of Waxman or Obama or Donald Duck's business what appliances I have. I am stingy on my electrical bill... hitting under $125 for most months (higher June _ August b/c this is the deep south). It is none of their business! The appliances and insulation and such in my home are between me and the BUYER. If I had ot add appliances... the house price will increase. Ah... but they say that won't happen. Please! This entire bill is a scam. Edited June 29, 2009 by Dirtroad Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Suzanne in ABQ Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 Have you read about this.... the bill that passed the House on Friday has an amendment that will make it a law that when I sell my house, a federal gov't inspector must come in and approve my home.... do I have all the current appliances that are energy efficient. HELLO? Why in the world would I buy a new stove or washer until my current one is broken/dead? This is beyond green trees & clean air. Plus, I am still fuming that NO ONE is reading this bill before they vote. Ihope more Senators can read b/c the House appears to be too busy, to arrogant, or to illiterate to manage it. Well, for years it has been the law in CA (in San Diego, at least, but probably the whole state) that you couldn't sell a house without first replacing all high-flow toilets with low-flow models. This type of legislature doesn't surprise me at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elizabeth Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?c111:1:./temp/~c111zOGq7E:e325880: Text of the bill I cannot find anything regarding appliances that is indicative of the problems raised by the OP . Odd thing that radio personalities discuss the legislation but by golly they sure do not want you to bother to read it...no links there just innuendo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jplain Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 I can't see how the government could prevent private sales of used appliances, so this legislation probably won't have the intended effect, except on new home building. If this passes, houses will be sold without the refrigerator, oven, dishwasher, washer, and dryer, unless of course they're already Energy Star certified. Sellers and buyers will likely negotiate private sales for these items to get around the problem of the inspection. Sellers might have to worry about water heaters, furnaces, and AC units. Of those, AC is the only one that is likely to mean big bucks for replacement. I imagine sellers might have to suck it up and buy new furnaces and water heaters since those can't be considered optional, but those are relatively small expenses. Again, the cheapest solution for the AC might be to detach the outdoor unit and sell the house as-is, with a private sale of the AC unit occurring separately. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
katemary63 Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 My stove, oven and dishwasher are built in. I haven't had a chance to read the bill yet, but I plan to. Would it also address hot water heaters and central air conditioners? Those can't be moved. Yes, and windows, doors and insulation. Anything not up to "code" or "energy efficient" It used to be that what was bought and sold was between the buyer and the seller. Now the Fed. Gov. is getting involved in EVERYTHING and we are loosing our freedoms at an alarming rate. Get ready...this ain't gonna be fun. Not for anyone who loves freedom and personal responsibility. If you want someone else to make your life safe and easy you - well then...you are going to be happy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Virginia Dawn Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 . I imagine sellers might have to suck it up and buy new furnaces and water heaters since those can't be considered optional, but those are relatively small expenses. . Actually this could be outrageously expensive for those trying to sell homes older than a couple of decades. We have an old cast iron boiler/oil furnace with radiators, plus 4 window unit air conditioners. It would cost us $8,000- $10,000 or more to put in central heat and air. We also have very little insulation (another $1,000) and very little cash. In fact most older homes would probably end up condemned if all federal regulations were followed to the letter. But wouldn't that be good for the housing industry and economy, with all those people forced to buy newer homes and appliances? :tongue_smilie: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TXMomof4 Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 You know I am sorry. It is none of Waxman or Obama or Donald Duck's business what appliances I have. I am stingy on my electrical bill... hitting under $125 for most months (higher June _ August b/c this is the deep south). It is none of their business! The appliances and insulation and such in my home are between me and the BUYER. If I had ot add appliances... the house price will increase. Ah... but they say that won't happen. Please! This entire bill is a scam. I also heard the prediction that energy bills will increase by up to 90%. I'm not sure how that would play out with the general population. I guess we'd HAVE to decrease electricity use - couldn't afford to do otherwise. How would business manage to stay in business? Companies would be moving out of this country faster than you could count. The California standards hasn't done too much for their economy lately - so let's follow their lead? I can't imagine this will pass the senate and I can't imagine how it would be implemented. Of course, I've said that a lot the last few months. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amy in NY Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 Yes, and windows, doors and insulation. Anything not up to "code" or "energy efficient" It used to be that what was bought and sold was between the buyer and the seller. Now the Fed. Gov. is getting involved in EVERYTHING and we are loosing our freedoms at an alarming rate. Get ready...this ain't gonna be fun. Not for anyone who loves freedom and personal responsibility. If you want someone else to make your life safe and easy you - well then...you are going to be happy. There are 2 issues with this bill. 1 - It's centered around questionable science and 2 - It is violating Ammendment 10 of the Bill of Rights. As for #1, I live in a 150 year old drafty farmhouse. To bring it to the standards in this bill would cost a fortune - probably more than the house is worth - and prohibit any sale of my home in the future. We work hard ourselves to keep cost down simply because we aren't rich and can't afford large heating/electric bills. (And even if I was rich, I would still work to keep my bills low.) If this bill passes the Senate, and it probably will, I will be in this house till I die because we won't be able to afford the 'upgrades' to move. And, #2, the Federal Government is severely overstepping it's constitutional rights with it's passage in the House. No where in the Constitution does it say the Federal Government can mandate what is in a private home. It's absolute hogwash. What right/individual choice will they take away next? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jplain Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 (edited) Actually this could be outrageously expensive for those trying to sell homes older than a couple of decades. We have an old cast iron boiler/oil furnace with radiators, plus 4 window unit air conditioners. It would cost us $8,000- $10,000 or more to put in central heat and air. We also have very little insulation (another $1,000) and very little cash. Hot water heaters and furnaces are not optional under housing code, but AC is. Homes can and would be sold without AC if this legislation goes into effect. It would be a piece of cake to sell the window units privately to the buyer. And on the bright side, radiator-type heating systems are quite energy efficient. They're probably Energy Star compliant even if they're not officially certified, so you probably wouldn't have to replace it. Though I don't believe this legislation is particularly well thought out, and I hope it fails to pass the Senate, I have to be realistic too. While it is unfortunate that we might be required to put a little more money into our homes before selling them, in my opinion that's just the way the cookie crumbles. I'll probably be spending cash on other things in order to prepare the house for sale, and this may have to be budgeted for as well. No one ever said owning a home was going to be hassle- or expense-free! Edited July 1, 2009 by jplain Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tammyla Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 If it passes there will be plenty of buyers for all the new green lines. Imo, as someone else mentioned, lots of people will be stuck with a huge financial burden or not selling. And I've not loved many of the new energy efficient appliances because they don't work well and don't last. Last dishwasher didn't make it to two years before being replaced and never really worked that well. My first washer lasted over 15 years, the second didn't make it to five. The repair bills made it cheaper to just buy another.:001_huh: We do conserve everywhere we can to save time, energy and of course money; and isn't reuse the ultimate recycling program. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halftime Hope Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 after skimming, I think this is the skinny re. this particular item within this massive bill: They are directing a new "secretary" of some new bureacracy to establish new national guidelines for energy use reduction. There will be funds set aside for covering the cost of retrofits; amounts are doled out according to the percentage decrease in use of energy. By statute, funds made available will never exceed 50% of the cost of the retrofit. Side note: IME, 50% would be a pipedream, when a 5 ton 16 SEER A/C (for 2K s.f of house) costs around $10K. I can't remember the energy savings of switching from 10 SEER to 16 SEER, but I'm betting the percentage savings would garner you a much lower reimbursement, according to the language of the bill, maybe down between $1-2K. But I digress. The bill goes on to direct states to implement energy labeling programs for new and retrofitted housing, and lists a number of opportunities for slapping a label on a building, including at the time of sale. See p. 361, line 7 through p. 362, line 13. There it is folks. It doesn't specify that the energy audit be a condition of sale, but it wouldn't take much for that to become the norm, if states chose to stipulate that that was one of their options for implementing the law. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirtroad Posted July 1, 2009 Author Share Posted July 1, 2009 I think it is funny that someone implies news on radio doesn't give me websites etc..... why should they? They are not the issue. The governments continual slope into tyranny is the issue. The host & speaker of the discussion did tell us where the information is from. It was READ ALOUD on the House floor just before the date. I am not computer savvy & do not know all the places to look. Does anyone know how to look up that which is read aloud on the house floor? I can go to the link. I may just contact the Reps office. The radio should not have to show me the bill... BUT THE GOV't should! ANd not 15 minutes before the vote... Watch out for Health Care coming. Pelosi said she WILL NOT make it available to the public in the 5 day window that was promised. Imagine that... broken promises from political crooks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirtroad Posted July 1, 2009 Author Share Posted July 1, 2009 (edited) Though I don't believe this legislation is particularly well thought out, and I hope it fails to pass the Senate, I have to be realistic too. While it is unfortunate that we might be required to put a little more money into our homes before selling them, in my opinion that's just the way the cookie crumbles. I'll probably be spending cash on other things in order to prepare the house for sale, and this may have to be budgeted for as well. No one ever said owning a home was going to be hassle- or expense-free! It sounds very easy to put a little more money into a house to sell. However, in this market today, many houses are not even selling for prices that cover the DEBT on the house. Plus, this isn't a little more money.... the A/C is necessray... they do not call rooms without Central heat & air "livable". So, you can sell a house without it but it isn't called "Livable"... imagine how low the price would drop in that category. So..... let's go buy the new appliances, upgade windows (25 year old house with 25 windows), and other required items.... it is scary to add all that up. My house has been on the market for 20 months. WE have reduced the price 3 times. We can't go lower or we can't pay bank, realtor, and attorney. We are trying to get $10,000 out of it.... a house we have completely renovated & lived in for 10 years..... trying to get a PUNY $10,000 b/c we have to have enough for down payment on next house. All banks are requiring 10-20% down with excellent credit history. We are looking at dropping the realtor and refusing to pay attorney fees at closing to get price lower... .but we are rural & live on an isolated property from road front... without a realtor is close to impossible! I don't know what we can do. However, this bill will KILL any chance we have to sell. So, to add new appliances, A/c, or windows to meet some arbitrary code that politicians are known to change on whims.... it ridiculous and IMPOSSIBLE. You can't get blood out of a turnip. So, it may be realistic on paper (I understand)... but it isn't a TRUE reality. Edited July 1, 2009 by Dirtroad Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirtroad Posted July 1, 2009 Author Share Posted July 1, 2009 Great point Tammy. I was just talking about this to a friend. It is no longer possible to "just fix" most things. Remember when you could fix your own car with a little know how? Now, everything has computers and electrical components. We bought a "smart" water heater and the mother board has failed 3 times! The old water heater lasted 30 years. I agree. Tammy is right on the money. Isn't it hilarious. The GREEN people preach recycle, reuse, and avoid all the trappings of materialism.... yet this bill can go so far as to require me to toss good appliances in great working condition to buy the new, latest/greatest appliance. it is a scam. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joannqn Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 This is so not good news for us. We've lived in this house for 10 years. It's getting to be too small for us. It's 1250 square feet, 3 bedrooms, and 1 bath for 6 of us...my husband's business is being run from the stair landing at this point. It's in a bad neighborhood. We want out but we can't get out right now even without this bill being passed. We've lost all but about $10,000 of our equity due to the economy tanking. The agent's fees and taxes will leave us with nothing, maybe even owing, after a sale...so we are sitting tight. If this bill were to pass, we'd be looking at probably $20,000 or more in upgrades. We have 17 single-pain wood wrapped windows, no insulation on the ground floor, an extremely old converted furnace, and who knows what else we'd have to do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joannqn Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 Transcript of of Boehner's Filibuster He goes into details of the amendment. Page # says this and page # says that. Apparently, the issue with homes being energy efficient before it can be sold, is on page 45 on the amendent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abreakfromlife Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 If this bill were to pass, we'd be looking at probably $20,000 or more in upgrades. Yup. I can't believe people think just 'upgrading' is some simple thing. If this thing were to really pass, we would have to completely redo our house, probably down to the studs to get it upgraded and 'livable' for the future. It's insane. I wish we could sell it now before anything gets passed - you know they're going to try again, even if this doesn't pass the Senate - but we're in MI. There is just no way we're going to sell it. We will probably be in this house for 10-15 years if this crap goes through, and we were really hoping to be out of it in 5. This is just absolutely ridiculous and intrusive and so NOT NECESSARY!!!! Even Greenpeace is against this bill, for crying out loud. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LizzyBee Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 Sellers might have to worry about water heaters, furnaces, and AC units. Of those, AC is the only one that is likely to mean big bucks for replacement. I imagine sellers might have to suck it up and buy new furnaces and water heaters since those can't be considered optional, but those are relatively small expenses. Again, the cheapest solution for the AC might be to detach the outdoor unit and sell the house as-is, with a private sale of the AC unit occurring separately. In the states I've lived in, houses also must be sold with stoves. So there's another thing the seller will have to upgrade. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BabyBre Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 There are 2 issues with this bill. 1 - It's centered around questionable science and 2 - It is violating Ammendment 10 of the Bill of Rights. As for #1, I live in a 150 year old drafty farmhouse. To bring it to the standards in this bill would cost a fortune - probably more than the house is worth - and prohibit any sale of my home in the future. We work hard ourselves to keep cost down simply because we aren't rich and can't afford large heating/electric bills. (And even if I was rich, I would still work to keep my bills low.) If this bill passes the Senate, and it probably will, I will be in this house till I die because we won't be able to afford the 'upgrades' to move. And, #2, the Federal Government is severely overstepping it's constitutional rights with it's passage in the House. No where in the Constitution does it say the Federal Government can mandate what is in a private home. It's absolute hogwash. What right/individual choice will they take away next? They can do it if we ALLOW them to! Everyone remember that ranting about this on this forum won't make a difference. Call your senators and tell them this bill is unconstitutional and that it is their responsibility to keep the federal government in check. Remind them that they work for us! Here's a link to US Senate contact info. Find your senators, make sure they hear you, and encourage others to do the same. http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm This bill is also known as Cap and Trade or Cap and Tax and it's going to do the same thing to small business by imposing overbearing regulations and tax penalties for noncompliance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hillary in KS Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?c111:1:./temp/~c111zOGq7E:e325880: Text of the bill I cannot find anything regarding appliances that is indicative of the problems raised by the OP . Odd thing that radio personalities discuss the legislation but by golly they sure do not want you to bother to read it...no links there just innuendo. The bill is over 1200 pages long. I don't know that it's published in its entirety anywhere. It wasn't even printed out for congressman and in the well of the House last week. Waxman's 300 page amendment was added at 3:00 am Friday morning, with the vote taking place on Friday afternoon. No one read it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TraceyS/FL Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 We'd not be able to sell either (except, i guess we could claim the divorce exception). Single pane windows - some of which are broken at this point, AC needs to be replaced, extreme lack of insulation, a leak on the water heater (that would have been a simple fix had it been done when i pointed it out and asked him to do it), drafty doors. I really wished i'd pushed for a window allowance when we bought the house now, we already were "getting" $3k for electrical issues so we didn't push for more. Knowing in hindsight how much he didn't put into the house - i wish we'd done more. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joannqn Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 If this thing were to really pass, we would have to completely redo our house, probably down to the studs to get it upgraded and 'livable' for the future. It's insane. My quote was assuming that the rest of the house was ok. If it came down to it, we'd probably have to just abandon the house and start over from scratch. They can do it if we ALLOW them to! Everyone remember that ranting about this on this forum won't make a difference. Call your senators and tell them this bill is unconstitutional and that it is their responsibility to keep the federal government in check. Remind them that they work for us! One of the things ranting on a public forum does is get the word out. I didn't know about this until I saw and read this thread. I've also spread the word on my Facebook page. The more people who know about it, the more people who will call. My understanding is that this link is the bill, with the amendment inserted where applicable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcconnellboys Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 No one reads any bill before they vote on it, LOL; this is nothing new. Glad I own my home and have no intention of selling.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joannqn Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 (edited) And it gets worse... The bill has a "placeholder", a section that has been reserved for future language to be added to the bill AFTER it has been voted on. Apparently, Barney Frank (D-MA ) told the House that the section will deal with regulations of financial derivatives market associated with reducing carbon emissions and that he's confident that a good system will be in place. Here's a link to the bill. You can see in the table of contents and on page 735, line 20 that it lists Section 788 as "section reserved". Do we really want our representatives to be voting on a bill before it has been completely written? That sections can be added AFTER it is law? That's not cool. Edited July 1, 2009 by joannqn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jplain Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 In the states I've lived in, houses also must be sold with stoves. So there's another thing the seller will have to upgrade. Ah, thanks for the correction. I didn't realize it might vary so much from place to place! :blush: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cricket Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 Transcript of of Boehner's Filibuster He goes into details of the amendment. Page # says this and page # says that. Apparently, the issue with homes being energy efficient before it can be sold, is on page 45 on the amendent. Thank you for posting this! I'm only on page 4 and it is very interesting reading. :001_smile: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hillary in KS Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 No one reads any bill before they vote on it, LOL; this is nothing new. Glad I own my home and have no intention of selling.... Yes. This is not the first bill that has passed with congressman not having read it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 No one reads any bill before they vote on it, LOL; this is nothing new. Glad I own my home and have no intention of selling.... Are you chuckling about this? How quaint to actually expect our representatives to read and understand the legislation they vote on.... I do expect them to read it. I'm just now becoming aware of how many times legislation is passed without my paid congressman or woman even glancing at it. It is their JOB, for crying out loud. What ever else they do, they should do this first. Frankly, I'd like to go back to the days when our reps actually wrote their own speeches and legislation, too. Then, we would know if they were really thinkers or not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BabyBre Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 Are you chuckling about this? How quaint to actually expect our representatives to read and understand the legislation they vote on.... I do expect them to read it. I'm just now becoming aware of how many times legislation is passed without my paid congressman or woman even glancing at it. It is their JOB, for crying out loud. What ever else they do, they should do this first. Frankly, I'd like to go back to the days when our reps actually wrote their own speeches and legislation, too. Then, we would know if they were really thinkers or not. :iagree: It was the same with the Recovery Act. It was actually impossible for our representatives to have read the bill before voting on it. This was the largest spending bill in our history, and every single one who voted to pass the stimulus package without reading it (which was all of the yeas) needs to be removed from office for such an amazingly irresponsible deriliction of their duties. And if it's unreasonable to expect these bills to be read cover to cover before being voted on, then that's a problem that needs to be addressed with either more time given or, better yet, simpler bills. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cricket Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 Are you chuckling about this? How quaint to actually expect our representatives to read and understand the legislation they vote on.... I do expect them to read it. I'm just now becoming aware of how many times legislation is passed without my paid congressman or woman even glancing at it. It is their JOB, for crying out loud. What ever else they do, they should do this first. Frankly, I'd like to go back to the days when our reps actually wrote their own speeches and legislation, too. Then, we would know if they were really thinkers or not. :iagree: completely! Silly me, I've assumed these people did read these bills. :001_smile: That is what they are paid for, isn't it? It has been obvious these last few months that it isn't the case. Maybe I've been living with my head in the sand, but this has surprised me. It amazes me that more people aren't upset about it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirtroad Posted July 1, 2009 Author Share Posted July 1, 2009 Transcript of of Boehner's Filibuster He goes into details of the amendment. Page # says this and page # says that. Apparently, the issue with homes being energy efficient before it can be sold, is on page 45 on the amendent. Thank you so much. I had violin lessons & errands after morning posts... I haven't been able to dig (and am not that good at it). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Word Nerd Posted July 2, 2009 Share Posted July 2, 2009 So much for a "new era of transparency," eh? http://readthebill.org/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcconnellboys Posted July 2, 2009 Share Posted July 2, 2009 I'm laughing sarcastically, yes. Sorry if that didn't come across. Unfortunately, I feel our elected officials have become a new landed aristocracy and that they're moving we peons more and more into a new feudal system. Serfdom, anyone? I did see someone on TV espouse an idea a few days ago about what it will take to reset our current system. But it's not something I can post about on these boards without creating an explosion.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MomLovesClassics Posted August 3, 2009 Share Posted August 3, 2009 I just saw this thread. Alarm bells are ringing in my head. Not that I am in a position to buy or sell a house, as I am not. However, my interperation, is government getting control telling people how to live their lives. Is this one step toward the government telling us what house we are and are not allowed to live in? I am confused and wondering if I need to start being constantly aware of politics? Do I need to constantly know what bills are being voted on so I can always write officials to voice my disapproval? I have been quite lax in trusting that things were not changing so drastically that the government would dictate how we live our lives. I prefer freedom. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Night Elf Posted August 3, 2009 Share Posted August 3, 2009 If you write a senator, how do you know the message got to him/her and that he/she read it? I've written a few times when threads on this board, like this one, suggest we write. I've never heard back from anyone which didn't surprise me considering how many emails or phone calls they might get. But it has made me wonder if my writing has done any good. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nestof3 Posted August 3, 2009 Share Posted August 3, 2009 I didn't see much discussion about houses of couples getting divorced being exempt from this. So, they'll turn a blind eye to couples getting divorced but stick it to those of us who are staying together. This is complete discrimination! Nothing like being punished for having a decent marriage -- or staying committed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TXMomof4 Posted August 3, 2009 Share Posted August 3, 2009 If you write a senator, how do you know the message got to him/her and that he/she read it? I've written a few times when threads on this board, like this one, suggest we write. I've never heard back from anyone which didn't surprise me considering how many emails or phone calls they might get. But it has made me wonder if my writing has done any good. I write, but I also call and speak to someone. Sen. Hutchison is terrible about responding - all I've ever gotten is the exact same form letter every time. Cornyn's office is really amazing at how quickly they respond. Even after a call I get a letter addressing whatever I called about (in the most generically specific form possible - lol) I haven't written yet about the healthcare, but I will be this week. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Georgiana Daniels Posted August 3, 2009 Share Posted August 3, 2009 I scanned through all the previous posts, but maybe I missed it.... When will this legislation go into effect? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.