An idea on ending 'lame-duck' sessions in Congress. Yes or no?

Good idea, but good luck getting Congress to pass it. ;-)

I disagree. There is important orientation to the ways of Congress that goes on before the swearing in. We set the terms of office and we know what they are before the election.

Maybe they could have a dorm for freshmen congress critters? Representative camp, or something. They could divide them along party lines and play capture the flag in a team building exercise. ~

After elections in the UK, the new government starts work as soon as the result is known, and parliament meets within a couple of days. There doesn’t seem to be a problem with orientation at all. Sure it’s confusing at first, but there are plenty of old-hands around to help guide the neophyte parliamentarians in the arcane practises of Westminster.

It would take a Constitutional Amendment to change the length of time between elections and the swearing in of Congress or the Executive Branch. Amendment XX is the reason we have the current timeframe. If the lame duck session was 30 days, they’d ram through as many bills as humanly possible. Remember the Pelosi method, pass it and then read it.

Most freshmen Congress members aren’t getting trained, they are hiring lobbyists to run their offices and doing fundraisers to pay off the campaign debts.

I’ve always said the most important words in our Constitution are the first five in our Bill of Rights: Congress shall make no law….

@bkcunningham

“Congress shall make no law….” It’s unfortunate the sentence didn’t stop there.

It does seem counter productive to vote someone out of office and then give them two months to enact legislation that they were voted out of office to stop. I have less problem with the gap for the president since he does not pass legislation. Executive orders can be easily retracted. But congress is another matter.

Sounds like the Brits have a better formula for this problem.

Actually, Parliament has a “wash-up period” for the last few days after the election has been announced but before dissolution. All unfinished business of the session must be dealt with swiftly and the Government seeks the cooperation of the Opposition in passing legislation that is still in progress. Some bills might be lost, other might be progressed quickly but in a much shortened form.

PS, we tried the UK way once. Remember, it didn’t work for us. ;)

http://www.parliament.uk/about/faqs/house-of-commons-faqs/genelec2010faq/

I like the idea of a lame duck congress. The final session in December 2010 is a fine example. Once the members knew that they weren’t going to be re-elected they finally found the balls to do what they should have done in the last two years. In the mean time the Republicans showed their true colors and that their decisions were purely politic without regard to the concerns of their constituents.

Republicans actually had the nerve to hold the 9–11 responders, the nuclear treaty, and the unemployed hostage until a tax law was passed to protect millionaire and billionaires.

I will probably never, again, vote for a Republican. It was utterly despicable.

@Ron_C – Maybe they should have that balls to do what’s right in the first place. That is more respectable to me

@cletrans2col I agree that the Democrats are a bunch of wimps but am happy that they finally developed a little backbone.

Not sure what you want? Do you want to end the “lame” or the “duck” ???