Formatting Plain Language
I essentially agree with everything Joe Davidson has to say in his column today about the need for bills and regulations to be written in plain language (although I don't particularly know anyone who doesn't!). As frustrating as they are to read, all the subsections amending specific lines of specific codes are actually necessary to make bills operative, of course. I wonder what the best way to condense--or work around--those sections is. Should they be footnotes that are operative, rather than just explanatory? Appendices? Should there be entirely separate plain-language translations of actual working legislation? I do wonder, if translation is the option, what happens if plain-language versions of legislation can be interpreted differently from working, operative versions of legislation. It seems like that could risk opening up ground for lawsuits. And plain language should definitely be adopted in a way that doesn't risk dramatically increasing the workload for Congressional staffers who actually write bills. Plain language is a critical goal, although not one with an immediate and clear solution.
NEXT STORY: State Department Diaries