I said "change to fix these issues". In the first and second, for example, I'd write rules which had the only thing required to happen on the floor was voting. I'd require bills to be in final form online a certain time before voting. I'd require revisions to be marked so that I could see when particular wording was added or deleted. I could easily see the difference between revision 4 and revision 5. In short I'd have the rules reflect the modern way of negotiating a big agreement, not the 1789 way, and not the PTA meeting way. The mechanics would be how IBM does a deal with AT&T.
In 1789 they couldn't hand every legislator a copy of the bill, so they had readings. We can't read a 1,000 page health care bill. Even handing us a new version of a 1,000 page bill is no good if you don't say what's changed since the one you gave me yesterday. It's idiocy to think I'm supposed to reread the bill and figure that out. And voters don't need to see bullshit debate. They need to see the fucking bill, and see it in time to scream about it. Or somebullshit feature smeaked in at the last minute.