Lame Name

There are many security related bills, acts, resolutions and laws being bandied around on Capitol Hill.  The serious implications of most of them have been debated at length.  I’d like to pick up the slack on discussing the least-serious aspect of lawmaking in America.  The dumb names.  I hate bill names that are obtuse, strained acronyms – especially ones that are blatant attempts to influence support by sounding patriotic, cute, catchy, innocuous or self-praising.  Here is a brief selection of recent bill names which show the level of respect our lawmakers have for our reasoning skills:

USA PATRIOT (Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001)
The undisputed champion of bloated, unnecessary names.  Apparently there was no existing adequate expansion of “U.S.A.”, so a new one had to be invented.  Also, due to a failure of linguistic dexterity on the part of some congressional staffer, the US (“United, Strengthened”) government is not authorized to Stop or Prevent terrorism, only to Intercept and Obstruct.  While the law itself is a complex issue, the name is clearly mock-worthy.

SAFE (The Security and Freedom Ensured Act of 2003)
This is supposed to be a way to “rein in” the USA PATRIOT Act, but the name is even more Orwellian.

VISA (Visa Information Security Act of 2001)
An early forerunner of the current VISA act, mostly focused on biometrics.  Gets bonus points for being a recursive acronym.  Good job!

VISA (Visitor Information and Security Accountability Act of 2003)
Generally makes it harder for certain classes of foreign visitors to enter the U.S.  Some of the proposed ideas are clever.  Some are too clever.  Then there’s the stuff about the bounty hunters.

VISA (Visitors Interested in Strengthening America Act of 2003)
Generally makes it easier for certain classes of foreign visitors (Mexican children and accompanying adults) to enter the U.S.  Pretty much the opposite of the other VISA acts.  Take that already apathetic and confused American voting public!

CAN-SPAM (Controlling the Assault of Non-Solicited Pornography and Marketing Act of 2003)
Least. Effective. Act. Ever.  Plus, wouldn’t it have been better to call it CAN’T-SPAM?

---

Now is the time on "Vastly Important Notes" where we help the reader(s) with their careers.  Answer this interview question for a shot at a job with a high-power Washington lobbyist firm:   

We want to advocate a bill which calls for unbridled evil to be loosed upon the land.  We want to call it the KITTENS Act of 2004, because no one will be against KITTENS in an election year.  Think of what KITTENS can stand for.

Bonus interview question for a geek job at CoreStreet (we’re hiring): 

What is the word for these kinds of bill names anyway?  They’re not really acronyms or backronyms (because it isn't unintentional) or bacronyms (because I don’t think the staffers try to get to a particular word, just a general theme), perhaps we need a new word.  How about "Crapronym”?