The Foundary
12/16/2010
Today on the Senate floor, John Kerry (D-MA) informed 15,304,498 voters from 16 states that their democratic voice is better left unheard. Kerry’s remarks came during a speech in which he urged the ratification of the ill-conceived New START (Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty) with Russia. Kerry and other Senate liberals are striving to ratify the treaty during this winter’s lame duck session, the last chance for Senators who have received their walking orders from the voters to pass the kind of legislation that got them kicked out of Washington in the first place.
In a recent Heritage Foundation report, Dr. Matt Spalding writes, “the ratification of New START by a lame duck Senate would not only ignore the message sent by voters in November but also break a significant precedent, consistent with the principle of consent, maintained by Presidents and Congresses since the passage of the Twentieth Amendment in 1933.”
Kerry seems to take a different view. Today he remarked on the Senate floor, “[the incoming class of Senators] may have been elected in this election, but they haven’t taken part in the year-and-a-half-long effort of preparing to deal with this treaty…”
This article continues at Heritage.org.
H/T theblogprof who also wrote:
This lame duck thing has got to end. Fact is, it is unconstitutional and even the Washington Post is pointing that little historical tidbit out. Via memeorandum: Lame-duck sessions supposed to be a thing of the past, historians say
Here’s the funny thing about this month’s lame-duck session of Congress, in which frantic lawmakers have pinballed from tax cuts to “don’t ask, don’t tell” to a nuclear weapons treaty:
It’s not supposed to exist.In 1933, historians say, the country ratified a constitutional amendment intended to kill off sessions like this – in which defeated legislators return to legislate. The headline in The Washington Post at the time was “Present Lame Duck Session Will Be Last.”
But because of a hole in that amendment, modern Congresses have not only met as lame ducks but have used the post-election session to take some of their most memorable votes.
When the written letter of the US Constitution opposes liberalism, activist judges divine intent and turn the written word on its head. When the intent opposes liberalism, activist judges turn to the letter instead. Whatever advances the liberal agenda.
Update: At HotAir.com, Are Lame Duck Sessions of Congress Unconstitutional?
