<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0">
    <channel>
        <title>Under The Influence: Public In Dark On Details Of Climate Bill: Groups</title>
        <link>http://undertheinfluence.nationaljournal.com/2009/06/groups-want-more-time-to-revie.php?rss=1</link>
        <description></description>
        <language>en</language>
        <copyright>Copyright 2009</copyright>
        <lastBuildDate>Wed, 24 Jun 2009 22:05:15 GMT</lastBuildDate>
        <generator>http://www.sixapart.com/movabletype/</generator>
        <docs>http://www.rssboard.org/rss-specification</docs>
       
        <item>
            <title>Public In Dark On Details Of Climate Bill: Groups</title>
            <description><![CDATA[<p>Good government groups are using House Democrats' rush to pass climate change legislation to renew their call for more congressional deliberation and public input on major legislation. <br /></p><p>"This Friday, Congress plans to vote on a bill that could fundamentally alter the American economy, dramatically affect the climate, and have huge implications for our national security. But, right now no one knows what's in the bill or how it came to be," said a release from the Sunlight Foundation, which leads a coalition called "ReadTheBill.org." <br /></p><p>The coalition is supporting legislation introduced in mid-June by Reps. <b>Brian Baird</b>, D-Wash., and <b>John Culberson,</b> D-Texas  that would require the House to post bills online 72 hours before they're debated. <br /></p><p>The Sunlight Foundation notes that the American Clean Energy and Security Act--known as the "Cap and Trade Energy Bill" ballooned from a 946-page bill marked up by the House Energy and Commerce Committee, to a 1201 page bill when it emerged after it negotiations with Agriculture Committee Chairman <b>Colin Peterson</b>, D-Minn.in mid-June, with little explanation.</p><p> With just 4 days before House leaders are promising a vote on June 26th, the bill was made available online in an unofficial version on the House Rules Committee's website. While that might seem to meet the 72-hour requirement Sunlight favors, foundation spokesman <b>Gabriela Schneider</b> says it is not much of a step forward. <br /></p><p>"Technically, what was posted is not the final legislation because it hasn't even been introduced yet," she said by e-mail. "Moreover, most people don't know to look at the Rules Committee site."</p>]]></description>
            <link>http://undertheinfluence.nationaljournal.com/2009/06/groups-want-more-time-to-revie.php?rss=1</link>
            <guid>http://undertheinfluence.nationaljournal.com/2009/06/groups-want-more-time-to-revie.php?rss=1</guid>

            <pubDate>Wed, 24 Jun 2009 22:05:15 GMT</pubDate>
        </item>
		
		


       
    </channel>
</rss>
  