I'd turn your question around though. Why is the Congressional Leadership so anxious to provide no time for review of the legislation -- even by those who must decide upon it? Do you think this is good for representative democracy?

And yet, though I follow all of the major political blogs, I note that rarely, if ever, are pending rules and regulations discussed or commented.

You follow the wrong blogs. OMB Watch blog is dedicated to just this issue: http://www.ombwatch.org/the_fine_print

Right now they are about the only place talking about the idiotic war by Senate Republicans against Obama's pick for OIRA head.

As of right now I can:

(a) watch congressional debates on C-Span and
(b) follow the text of legislation on Thomas.

Why is a wating period necessary?

The Federal government already has a ton of transparency.

After the fact, sure, but the point is that we need more insight into the sausage making in the hope of cleaning it up -- think Upton Sinclair, for instance.

I'd also note that the sheer volume of information published by the federal government is not synonymous with transparency. Whose to say that a "ton" of transparency is the right amount for the "megatons" of dollars being expended?

Well, the only advantage I could ever see out of his idea is to at least allow time for legislators to actually read what they're voting on.

Wishful thinking!

That’s why I’d like to see a waiting period between the final release of legislation and the vote. The public could then go all “Army of Davids” on the legislation, which would enhance transparency, democratic deliberation, etc.

My understanding is that Obama was supposed to do this. Wait at least several days before signing legislation. Of course, it has only happened once I think.

So much for promises. But hey, its boring and nobody reads it...like policy analysts, think tanks, and so forth...nope nobody reads, in some cases not even the politicians voting for this crap. SWGAF.

These three things lead me to believe that a waiting period between final versions of legislation and actual voting really won’t make much of a difference in terms of public input into legislation.

Yet most states (all?) require final versions of legislation to be read on three separate days. Congress used to require all bills to be read, but it dispensed with the requirement for the reason that illiteracy was no longer an issue and the members could read the bills on their own. I think it's well past time to re-consider that premise.