Skip to main content

Replies sorted oldest to newest

This sounds like a dumb idea, but the article's suggestion that it's some attempt to usurp the Constitution is silly fear-mongering.

 

Article 1, Section 5:

 

"Each House may determine the rules of it proceeding."

 

As long as all members of Congress still get to vote, it doesn't matter how they decide to decide what to vote on.  Perfectly Constitutional.

Look, before you all get too carried away, the term "super congress" was coined by Ryan Grim in this and another article.  Others are calling this a "super committee". 

While I am not a fan of what has came out of these "committee's" on the last few pieces of legislation,

Washington is and always HAS been ran by committee.  Part of the problem and what is new is President Obama's determination to try to obtain bi-partisanship support for every major piece of legislation that has been proposed during his administration.  This concept has failed miserably with inclusion of opposing sides resulting in inaction rather than productive input of legislation.  Examples at this point REALLY aren't necessary.

There really is nothing new to see here and I am surprised that Ryan Grim is using this form of Entertainment Tonight journalism.  I usually respect his work.

Last edited by rocky

Add Reply

Post

Untitled Document
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×