Kingdon argues that members of Congress resort to ‘problemistic search’ (96). That is, they search for information only for decisions that are d

So far, this bill has not been decided upon although it just went to committee in November. However, support for this bill has been generous, evidenced in the number of co-sponsors and their political party diversity. Furthermore, the co-sponsors of this bill are notable members of Congress, further adding weight to their sponsorship.

This is not to say that everyone supports this bill. In fact, there has been much reaction against the bill, especially from lobbyists in the nutrition/supplement industry who claim that such legislation will remove many beneficial supplements from health-food store shelves (O’Meara, 2003). However, within Congress, there has been a great deal of support for this bill, which in turn presents the likelihood that it will be passed into law. Senator Hilary Clinton is another supporter of this bill, which again goes to illustrate the broad-based support for this issue. In fact, Clinton went so far as to co-sponsor bill #S 722, which is a closely related bill intended to remove ephedrine products from the marketplace (O’Meara, 2003).

Senator Richard Durbin introduced this bill because of the myriad of health risks associated with the use of ephedrine products. For instance, according to the text of the resolution, ephedrine

Some topics in this essay:
Voting Decisions, Senator Durbin, Hilary Clinton, Richard Durbin, Congress Workings, Drug Administration, Steve Bechler, Human Services, Labor Pensions, Thomaslocgov November, o’meara 2003, ephedrine products, health risks, support bill, supplements containing ephedrine, co-sponsors bill, vote bill, containing ephedrine, supplements containing, constituents colleagues, senators representatives, senator richard durbin, containing ephedrine alkaloids, dietary supplements containing,