Readers' Comments
Total Comments: 45
Page 1 of 6
Page 1 of 6
« Previous | Next »
House to Federal Employees: Write in "Plain Language"
Total Comments: 45
Page 1 of 6
Page 1 of 6
« Previous | Next »
Free Email Newsletter
| Close | Change | YTD | |
| G | $13.2033 | +0.0011 | +0.64% |
| F | $13.5947 | +0.0048 | +1.95% |
| C | $13.6927 | -0.0027 | +3.59% |
| S | $17.9723 | +0.0233 | +9.18% |
| I | $18.5302 | +0.1287 | -0.04% |
| Close | Change | YTD | |
| L 2040 | $16.1474 | +0.0291 | +3.28% |
| L 2030 | $15.9136 | +0.0249 | +2.93% |
| L 2020 | $15.6956 | +0.0208 | +2.45% |
| L 2010 | $15.4351 | +0.0080 | +1.41% |
| L Income | $14.0647 | +0.0064 | +1.33% |
March 14, 2010
Search:
Custom Search
Home | About Us | FAQ's |
Site Map | Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
RSS 
|
Twitter 
| Mobile
© 2010 FedSmith Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Plain Language
Department of Veterans Affairs
Tue Apr 15, 2008 9:52 AM
Post Reply
It seems to me that Congress should start with all of the "stuff" they publish. What they put out is even more confusing then the tax code.
Re: Plain Language
HHS
Tue Apr 15, 2008 1:43 PM
Plain Language
DoD
Tue Apr 15, 2008 10:10 AM
Post Reply
Plain language will (has) had trouble catching on perhaps because that is the intent! Imagine a tax law, written in plain english that states "This is a tax break for a specific company that made significant contributions to my campaign". Pretty easy to understand, impossible to defend!
Plain Talk
DOT
Tue Apr 15, 2008 10:12 AM
Post Reply
Our regulations are littered with congressional earmarks for certain excepted practices (not always money). To write a reply letter that doesn't include options available to the constituant is not plausable nor fair. Congress made this mess. Constituants paid good money to get out of regulatory oversight and all have the right to participate equally.
Simplify
USDA FS
Tue Apr 15, 2008 10:17 AM
Post Reply
Plain language advocates should pick up the pen, much mightier than the sword, and take on those people who insist on using the words "utilize" and "utilization"! The word use (noun) or use (verb) instead. Stop using three or four syllables when one conveys meaning nicely.
Utilize and utilization are useless....
Re: Simplify
DFAS
Tue Apr 15, 2008 12:04 PM
Re: Simplify
DoD
Wed Apr 16, 2008 10:09 AM
Plain Language
Air Force
Tue Apr 15, 2008 10:29 AM
Post Reply
I find it ironic that President Clinton mandated "plain language" yet argued "...it depends on what the meaning of is is."
Consider the effect on the economy?
DOD
Tue Apr 15, 2008 10:34 AM
Post Reply
What!!! Plain language would put many people out of work!
Consider the lawyers, the brokers, the tax preparers, the IRS employees, the...well, you get the idea.
I wish I remembered where I first read this idea: Make any law not easily and correctly interpreted by an average 8th grader uninforceable.
I would even be happy with the idea of an average 12th grader, but you get the idea.
We would have fewer laws and fewer lawsuits if plain language were required everywhere.
Plain language
FAA
Tue Apr 15, 2008 10:43 AM
Post Reply
Anyone care to explain ANYTHING written by the House or Senate? Talk about incomprehensable mish-mash!! Congress should get their house in order before complaining about anyone else.
Maybe the problem is that a bunch of lawyers can't understand anything that is written in plain language, or has any technical terms in it.
What a bunch of boobs!