Très bon article dans le Washington Post de ce matin! Un retour sur le vingtième amendement qui devait éviter les "lame-duck" session, des séances au Congrès pendant lesquelles les politiciens défaits en novembre sont brièvement de retour comme législateurs.
"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."
Le coeur du problème selon l'auteur de l'article (et l'avis d'historiens):
"This amendment will free Congress of the dead hand of the so-called 'lame duck,' " Rep. Wilburn Cartwright (D-Okla.) said as it was debated in 1932.
But there was a problem. The amendment didn't actually say it would end lame-duck Congresses forever. Its text only moved Congress's end date from March back to early January (it also shifted the presidential inauguration from March to Jan. 20).
At that time, historians say, it was inconceivable that lawmakers would journey back to Washington to meet for a few weeks after Thanksgiving.
"The big mistake of the crafters of the 20th Amendment was that they didn't really anticipate airplane travel," said Bruce Ackerman, a Yale University law professor. "It takes a lot of time to go from a district in Texas by train to Washington, D.C. Who's going to schlep there?"
Intéressant, non?
Le lien pour l'article:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/12/17/AR2010121703572_2.html
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire