I think enough congresscritters have been making noise about being upset they can only read it behind closed doors during the negotiation process that they will probably read it now that it is being published in full. Michael Capuano, the rep for East Cambridge/Somerville, MA sent out an update that was basically saying "letting us read it in a closet without taking notes is basically useless. I'm a tax lawyer, not an international trade expert, so without outside input, I can't decide anything meaningful about it.
EDIT: tptacek is right: it is important to be clear that it is becoming open.
I use it frequently. It's my preferred gender-neutral term for referring to members of Congress. I don't know it's true origin, but I picked it up from Dave Barry.
I wasn't aware it was anything other than a slightly-silly gender-neutral term for members of the House of Representatives. I suppose 'critters' could be pejorative but I'd not seen it used that way.
Just to be clear: people were able to "read it in a closet" while it was being negotiated, because Congress was not supposed to be in the loop for the negotiation. That is no longer the case; the treaty will now be published and downloadable on the Internet, and Congress will have months to read it, discuss it, and to decide whether to ratify it.
EDIT: tptacek is right: it is important to be clear that it is becoming open.