What are some of the advantages , and disadvantages of passing legislation quickly?

What are some of the advantages , and disadvantages of passing legislation quickly?Does fundraising consume too much of the legislators' time and energy? Does it affect their behavior? Why or why not|||What do you mean by "quickly"? In this administration, "quickly" has meant not giving legislators nor the public time to read through the legislation that they are voting on.





Yes, fund-raising does consume too much of legislators time. Do you know why they do this, even legislators that are unopposed? It's because any excess funds go into their personal coffers, to spend as they see fit, without any constraints.





The thing that would affect their behavior more than anything else would be term limits for legislators. The president has a term limit, why not the legislator? If legislators knew that they would have to return to the private sector in 2 or 4 terms, wouldn't they have a different motivation than being in a continual state of "running for office"?|||Passing legislation to quickly is bad, good legisaltion needs to be looked at to try to figure out the consequences. Unfortunately alot of the time the legisaltures say we will revisit it and amend it in the future.





Sometimes the future never comes where they do not get chance to revisit it or make the right changes they wanted to before.





But in no means does this mean the other side should be able to filibuster the bill to death, or delay it enough so the timing is wrong so the bill will not pass.





Fundraising begins of day 1 in office. It takes more and more money to run, and lots more after you make it through the primaries.





Anytime politicians have so much money by lobbyists they will owe them a favor.





This has anegative effect, the politicans where elected for the people, and not the lobbyists or the interest paying the lobbyist.|||Carefully considering the ramifications of any legislation takes time. The Congressmen have staffs to help them go over upcoming laws and make assessments of its qualities, good or bad.





One disadvantage of a long-drawn out process is it gives opportunistic politicians a chance to stick their pork projects onto the bill that has little to do with the original intent.





Also, it could just be that the need truly is immediate. But I think this reasoning should rarely be used. If there is an immediate need, call a church or volunteer relief organization. The response will be faster.





I think a lot of the fund raising they do coincides with dinners and lunches with lobbyists. That's an efficient use of time. They can raise money for their reelection and decide which bills to pass at the same time.|||if it's a radical dangerous agenda, pushing it through congress quickly ensures that our elected representatives do not have enough time to review and digest it. Then we have the unconstitutional conditions of "taxation without representation".





secondly, as our representatives don't have time to review and debate the issues in a piece of legislation, the press will never know about it (and neither will you) until our dear leader chairman MAO-bama signs it into law. Then it's far too late to do anything about it.





Get used to this with one party running both the legislative and executive branch of our government. it's gonna get a lot worse.|||Say you were the government %26amp; it were a private enterprise, and had a great idea for say "a health care store" and you went to the bank and asked for a loan - start up money. The bank would ask you for your business plan, check your credit and determine the risk....BEFORE they give you the money. the government is asking for the money up front before they have a clue how Government Health care is even going to work. Its absolutely ridiculous. This leaves the funds wide open for waste, fraud and default, and unhappy public. So, they need to put on their thinking caps and come up with a plan first. Actually, I like things as they are. We ALL already have access to health care. And someone /some group is going to get rich and taxpayers get shafted.|||John F- I agree with you. Legislation should be reviewed. Time taken to understand the pros and cons, and make an informed decision. You site the Patriot Act. I would point to the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act as a reason not to rush legislation. The bill was rammed down our throats (to put it nicely) and will do far more damage to the United States and it citizens than The government listening to the phone conversations of non US citizens calling overseas. Spending trillions of dollars we dont have, and pushing the nation to the brink of bankruptcy is far more damaging. Give me ONE example of how the \Patriot Act negatively affected YOU.|||If you're a Democrat and in power, it means you can pass a bill without reading it. Of course you can claim ignorance later and thereby blame everyone else when something goes wrong.|||advantage - quick political payback


disadvantage - people still loses job and congress showed they are gullible to the One.|||In most cases there are to many loop holes and the legislation is not worth the paper it is written on.|||Immediacy stops dissent.