While much has been hypothesized regarding Omnibus Bills, it is of the essence to note that they primarily refer to laws containing a wider array of substantive matters brought before the legislature with the sole intent of convenience. An Omnibus Bill is structured in such a way that it ties the legislature; hence, hindering them from making any changes on a bill. For this reason, the strategy behind Omnibus Bill is to coerce Congress members to adopt, vote, and enact laws that they may not support. An Omnibus Bill often introduces certain things in a bill, which the congress may not wish to defeat. Certainly, this forces the Congress to adopt and vote for such things. Many at times, the Congress is divided into two opposing sides, one advocating for the enactment of a given law, whereas the other side may not be of the same opinion (Krutz, 2001).
For an Omnibus Bill to draw support from both sides, objectionable provision is often introduced into such bills. As such, if a bill comprises of certain things that are opposed by one side, the other side will be prompted to vote for the enactment that may not like. From this analysis, the primary strategy of an Omnibus Bill is to have certain provisions passed, when it would have been voted down. In most cases, Omnibus Bills differ from normal bills in that they propose that various changes be made on existing statutes, which forces Congress members to either defeat or adopt the proposed legislative package. Overall, Omnibus Bills seek to streamline various legislation that may be related to one policy (Krutz, 2001). As such, such bills often precipitate distraction and confusion from the two sides of Congress. This will surely result in the defeat or approval of bills whose outcome would have been difficult in normal situations.
Reference
Krutz, G. S. (2001). Hitching a ride: Omnibus legislating in the U.S. Congress. Columbus: Ohio State University Press.
