One Bill, One Subject Transparency Act This bill requires each bill or joint resolution to include no more than one subject and the subject to be clearly and descriptively expressed in the measure's title. An appropriations bill may not contain any general legislation or change to existing law that is not germane to the subject of such bill. The bill voids measures or provisions noncompliant with these requirements, including appropriation provisions outside the relevant subcommittee's jurisdiction. Additionally, a person (individual or entity) who is aggrieved by the enforcement, or the attempted enforcement, of a law that passed without complying with this bill's requirements may sue the United States for appropriate relief.
The implementation of HB 91 would likely lead to significant changes in how bills are drafted and presented in Congress. Currently, it is not uncommon for appropriations bills to include a variety of unrelated provisions, which can obfuscate the intent and accountability of lawmakers. By establishing a clear demarcation of subjects, HB 91 could improve the relevance and focus of legislation, thus potentially increasing public trust in governmental operations. Furthermore, it would compel lawmakers to be more deliberate and precise in their legislative initiatives.
House Bill 91, known as the 'One Bill, One Subject Transparency Act', seeks to ensure that each legislative measure introduced in the Congress embraces no more than one subject. The essence of this bill is to promote transparency in the legislative process by requiring that the subject of any bill or joint resolution is clearly articulated in its title. This requirement would mitigate the practice of bundling unrelated issues into a single bill, a process colloquially known as 'pork-barrel politics'. By enforcing these regulations, the bill aims to foster a more straightforward law-making process.
There is potential for contention surrounding HB 91, particularly regarding the enforcement mechanisms included in the bill. Should any legislation violate the one-subject rule, the entire measure would be deemed void. This opens the door for lawsuits by individuals or entities claiming to be aggrieved by any such enforcement, raising questions about the abandonment of certain legislations and the broader implications for legislative strategy. Critics of the bill may argue that this could complicate and obstruct the legislative process further, while supporters may contend that it is a necessary step towards clearer governance.