I may be unusual in this, but I was able to read the Wyden bill, with ammendments, in a weekend. It's not much bigger than The Lord of the Rings Trilogy, and much less complex.
I'm with you on this to an extent.
Legislation is written with wide margins, double-spaced, and decently big type. I was reading a draft of the climate bill for the House, which was right around 1000 pages. I'd say that in a real, serious book with normal style</subjective opinion> those 1000 pages would condense to around 250 pages or less.
The problem is, a huge number of things can depend on very few words, or even lack thereof. I had a journal about the proposed cybersecurity bill. Notice the language:
SEC. 18. CYBERSECURITY RESPONSIBILITIES AND AUTHORITY.
The President
(1) within 1 year after the date of enactment
of this Act, shall develop and implement a com-
prehensive national cybersecurity strategy, which
shall include
[....]
(2) may declare a cybersecurity emergency and
order the limitation or shutdown of Internet traffic
to and from any compromised Federal government
or United States critical infrastructure information
system or network;
[....]
(3) FEDERAL GOVERNMENT AND UNITED STATES CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE INFORMATION SYSTEMS AND NETWORKS
The term Federal gov-
ernment and United States critical infrastructure in-
formation systems and networks includes
(A) Federal Government information sys-
tems and networks; and
(B) State, local, and nongovernmental in-
formation systems and networks in the United
States designated by the President as critical
infrastructure information systems and net-
works.
So basically, if the President says it's a critical network, then it is a critical network, according to statute, and subject to the President's authority to block or selectively filter traffic. Who knows what else, maybe DoS too? What does "limitation" mean? Now, in a logical world, nothing this vague and wide-reaching would ever make it into statute in the first place.
But if anyone tried to call out the legislation for it, they'd be met with responses saying that nothing too extreme would be allowed to happen (This is America!) and that whoever's criticizing it is just fear-mongering. Even though the legislation authorizes exactly that in plain English. This opens the door to incrementalism, where they slowly but surely get closer and closer to the authority they've already been granted. Just up the dosage every now and then, and the people are too dumb to realize.
All that said, I haven't read anything on the health bill(s?) yet. But I'll be completely surprised if they don't have this wordplay chicanery going in the health legislation too.
