by Jack Lee
ATTENTION: Wally Herger, here’s a good idea for you, why don’t you write a bill for this once we get the GOP in control again?
When you get fired from your job you barely have enough time to gather your things before you’re heading down the road. So why do we give the people we fire at election time another two months to continue the polices that we disapproved? Consider, even if democrats are voted out of power in the House, they’ll still have several more key votes on policies we have rejected.
Do you think its time to make a change to the way we’ve always done it? I do and I would like to at least freeze the voting power on Congressman that have been fired by the voters. They can have the next two months to clean up their office and say good-bye to all their lobbyist friends and then line up jobs on some committee somewhere. But, once they have lost the election – they should also lose their vote in the House. What do you think?
It is not unheard of, some states install the winners the next day. I think this is a great idea who’s time has come.
Historically, we waited to give the reps time to get to the capitol.
This is no longer the case.
Kick ’em out the day after.
I’d like to see congress in recess for two weeks after the election, giving them one week to clean out their office and the next week to move in.
Would also like the same to apply for state and local reps too. I see no reason for our own city council to be seated in January when it could be done the next day.
Peggy you make an excellent point. I think we should lobby the city council to change the charter so this could be done. Maybe this would be a good project for the local CRA and local BCRP? Would you like to bring it up at the next CRA meeting?
Qunetin what do you think of the idea of changing the Chico charter to allow us to get elected officials in right after the election?
Thanks Toby…I’m hoping we can generate some support for this idea, because I really think it’s non-partisan and it’s something the voters deserve. I’m kinda surprised Wally didn’t introduce some legislation like this years ago. It’s not that controversial is it?
Without commenting on the proposal, I would point out that it would require a constitutional amendment to change when congressmen are sworn in.
The 20th Amendment to the Constitution sets dates when terms start and stop for representatives, senators and the president.
Interestingly, the amendment pushed back when Congress starts its new session (it was originally the first Monday of December). On the other hand, the amendment moved back when the president is sworn in (Jan. 20 instead of March 4).
Good points Ryan, you know your Constitution…I admire that.
“20th ammendment – Section 2. The Congress shall assemble at least once in every year, and such meeting shall begin at noon on the 3d day of January, unless they shall by law appoint a different day.”
Senator GEORGE W. NORRIS proposed the amendment on March 2, 1932, as a way to shorten the period of time in election, or even-numbered, years during which members of Congress who had failed to be reelected (the lame ducks) would serve in office until their terms expired.
The handicap of a session of Congress with numerous lame ducks was particularly evident in December 1932. During the thirteen weeks of that session of the Seventy-second Congress, 158 defeated members (out of a total of 431) served until the new Congress convened in March 1933. In the meantime the newly elected members, spurred by their recent electoral victories and the problems of a nationwide economic depression, had to wait inactive and unorganized until the term of the old Congress expired.
The Norris proposal was ratified by the requisite number of state legislatures on January 23, 1933, and took effect on October 15 of that year. The new amendment stipulated that the terms of all members of Congress begin on January 3. It also required Congress to convene on January 3 each year and for the president and vice president to be inaugurated on January 20 rather than in March. Two sections of the amendment also clarified the problem of presidential succession under certain conditions.
Read more: Lame-Duck Amendment – Congress, January, March, President, Terms, and Session http://law.jrank.org/pages/8047/Lame-Duck-Amendment.html#ixzz13EJXfnl6
“The Congress shall assemble at least once in every year”
Too bad they didn’t specify a time limit…a week, two weeks…LOL!
“…spurred by their recent electoral victories and the problems of a nationwide economic depression, had to wait inactive and unorganized until the term of the old Congress expired.”
Nothing can stop them from meeting and planning in the meantime, if they are of a mind, so that once installed they would be ready to move quickly.
Anybody else recall the Obama pre-installation team? They suggested that Bush should just step aside…get the L out of the way. The nation resisted!
Our servants are elected for a specific term. If we begin fiddling with it we only invite further fiddling and rediculous notions like, it depends on what the meaning of “term” is.