Politics · Satire
WASHINGTON — In a rare display of unity, Congress overwhelmingly passed the Framework for Understanding Tomorrow's Undertakings and Related Endeavors Act on Thursday, establishing a blue-ribbon committee to study whether future legislation might someday be feasible, and if so, what feelings that might involve.
The FUTURE Act, which passed the Senate 94-3, does not fund anything, mandate anything, regulate anything, or change anything. Senators from both parties hailed it as proof the system still works.
'This is what the American people sent us here to do,' said one senator at a triumphant press conference. 'They said, work together. They didn't specify on what. We heard them.'
The bill's journey was hailed as a masterclass in modern lawmaking. Introduced 14 months ago as a 6-page proposal, it grew to 840 pages in committee as members attached amendments, then shrank back to 9 pages when everyone's amendments were removed in exchange for removing everyone else's, a process one aide described as 'legislative catch and release.'
The final text commits the new committee to producing a report within 18 months. The report's findings are not binding. The report's findings are, in fact, already known: staffers confirmed the executive summary was written before the bill passed, concludes that 'further study is needed,' and recommends the formation of a committee, raising the possibility that the committee will recommend itself.
The three dissenting senators objected for characteristically diverse reasons. One called the bill 'a disgrace to the very concept of doing things.' One opposed the word 'tomorrow' as 'speculative.' The third stated he votes no on all bills whose acronyms spell words, calling the practice 'the real corruption,' a position that has made him, by some measures, the chamber's most effective legislator.
Political scientists note the FUTURE Act continues a proud tradition of procedural achievement replacing actual achievement. 'In the 1960s, Congress passed laws and then held hearings about them,' said Dr. Miriam Fowler of Georgetown. 'Today we hold the hearings first, as a form of theater, and then pass a law scheduling more hearings. It's not governance, exactly, but it is content.'
Constituent reaction has been surprisingly warm. 'I saw they passed something bipartisan and I felt a little spark of hope,' said Ohio voter Ken Brzezinski. 'Then I read what it was and the spark went out. But for a second there, it was nice. Honestly, that second might be the best thing government's done for me all year.'
The committee is expected to convene in the fall, pending the resolution of a dispute over the room. Both parties have agreed the dispute itself demonstrates the urgent need for a committee, and negotiations are underway to form one.