The lame duck that wouldn’t die
The WaPo offers this fascinating glimpse into why the lame duck sessions of Congress have continued despite the obvious need to stop them. It turns out that the 20th Amendment (passed in 1933) was intended to do just that when it moved the transition date from March to January. At the time, this effectively thwarted lame duck sessions because, “…it was inconceivable that lawmakers would journey back to Washington to meet for a few weeks after Thanksgiving.”
Ah, those short-sighted legislators! Enter airplane travel. Although the amendment did work as intended for many decades, by the 80s it had become obsolete. And now we have the worst—most “ambitious,” that is—lame duck session since the amendment was passed, according to John Copeland Nagle, a law professor at the University of Notre Dame and “one of the obscure amendment’s few scholars.”
And I love this quote:
“We wouldn’t need to be doing all this in the lame duck if the Republicans had not obstructed and delayed everything that we had been trying to do,” said Regan LaChapelle, a spokeswoman for Reid. “I don’t see anything wrong with working for the American people to get things done.”
Yes, the Republicans made them do it. The Democrats tried and tried to get those “Bush tax cuts” [sic] extended while the Republicans stood in their way and pushed for HCR and cap and trade. And of course, it’s the “American people” clamoring for the enactment of the rest of the Democratic Party agenda. That’s why the Democrats won such a resounding victory last November.
If there were one progressive dem left in politics he’d swear his purpose was to do what Americans unknowingly wanted done.
Ah, Regan LaChapelle – any relation to Goneril? (sorry) – so forgiving. So willing to offer redemption. So when the American people rise up with one voice and say they just want Harry and his chums to get out of Dodge Regan is willing to tell them to hush, because the really important stuff is going to get done anyway.
Dear Nevada voters,
Why ????
I can’t take listening to the
weaselSenator from Nevada any more. Another 2 more years and my head will explode!Please give an answer below
vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv
The political tendency that sees the role of judges as (in part) to enact social policies that the legislature does not is not likely to be moved by the idea that it should do no more than caretaking after an election.