|
|
|
|
|
by anigbrowl
3480 days ago
|
|
I disagree, but I applaud the high quality of your argument. it seems reasonable that if the Senate would prefer to remain permanently in session so as not to diminish its authority, it's within its right to do so Legally yes, politically no. There's no quorum so it's not possible to transact any legislative business and everyone knows this. That gap between the procedural state and reality delegitimizes the procedure through its self-evident falsity. If the public perceives the government to be a sham, why keep obeying it? I suggest to you that the emergent political reality is that the constitution is becoming a dead letter and that the Declaration of Independence more closely mirrors national sentiment. |
|
Edit: it's also worth noting that serving in the Senate was originally a part-time occupation; recesses of several months were common until the 1930s. That's a very different case than in 2016, where the longest break was five weeks.