Your legislators are trying to meet behind closed doors. Are you going to stand for it? Vote now!

A bill came before the committee on Rules and Administration labeled H. CON. RES. 1 on January 6, 2009 that reads as follows:

“Resolved by the House of Representatives(the Senate concurring) that pursuant to clause 4, section 5, article I  of the Constitution, during the One Hundred Eleven Congress, the Speaker of the house and the majority leader or their respective designees, acting jointly  after consultation with minority leader of the house and the minority leader of the senate, may notify the members of the house and senate, respectively, to assemble at a place outside the district of Columbia if, in their opinion, the public interest shall warrant it.”

In studying the above mentioned portion of the constitution sited by the bill, there is a provision for meeting in places other than the seat of government.  The constitution expresses the need for all participants in these meetings to be notified and for there to be agreement in both houses of Congress that this is appropriate.  It would be interesting to know the reactions of the senator’s constituents.

In a brief overview of comments posted on politivote.com concerning this bill, I have yet to find a person who is entirely comfortable with Congress meeting outside the seat of government.  One person mentions cyber-meetings which would allow for video conferencing as a possible benefit.  However, this person had strong reservations.  There may well be other benefits of the bill.  The problem is that it is left to the reader to surmise what they could be. In attempting to do so, I have met with little success.  Possibly a foreign invasion or other catastrophe could prevent access to the proper seat of government; but this country is not facing such a crisis.

The authors of the bill do not give us an idea of what prompted them to create this piece of legislation in the form of whereas clauses.  It has been my experience that resolutions begin with whereas clauses which give justification for the proposed action to be taken.  However, this bill does not have any justification built into it.  So, without any clue as to what the author of the bill is thinking, I like other readers can see mostly potential for abuse.  It could allow for things to be done in secret that will only benefit a select few.  It will undermine the spirit of democracy because the public won’t know what laws are being passed and won’t be able to make intelligent decisions without this knowledge.  We at politivote believe that if the congress meets to do its business at the proper place, there is more transparency.  If Congress meets else where, there is more potential to hide these meetings, and thus hide the actions of Congress.