Organizing the Militia

“To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such part of them as may be employed in the service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the appointment of the officers, and the authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress.” Article 1, Section 8, Clause 16, US Constitution

This clause is known as “organizing the militia”. The original purpose of the militia was to protect the people of the state from the federal government. The Anti-Federalists thought that the Congress would gradually let the funds for the Militia disappear. The Anti-Federalists advocated the Second Amendment to protect the citizens’ right to bear arms.

Second Amendment: “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.”

The Second Amendment did protect the right to bear arms, but the Congress still controlled the Militia. The Militias could still function as originally intended within the State, but Congress has the power to organize, discipline, and arm the Militia for federal purposes.

With the Organizing the Militia clause, the Federalists tried to make the Militia into a national reserve of uniform, interchangeable units.

In 1792, Congress passed the Uniform Militia Act. This established an “obligated” militia. This means that all able-bodied white men between the ages of 18 and 45 had to enroll. This Militia had a very poor performance during the War of 1812. The obligated militia was disbanded. After that, the “uniformed” militia replaced it. Uniformed militia means that it was made up of people who chose to serve. The National Guard replaced the uniformed militia. The National Guardsmen remain volunteers, a Citizen-Soldier.

The National Security Act of 1916 made state militias available for overseas duty as well as being used for domestic disturbances. This functionally stripped the states of militia powers. States may call up the National Guard, but federal government needs take precedence.

“We the people” originally gave Congress the power to organize, arm, and discipline the Militia. Today, that power still rests with Congress, but the intent of having the Militia protect the people of the states from the federal government no longer exists.

The “organizing the militia” clause was originally intended to allow a means for the people of a state to protect themselves from the federal government. Today, this clause allows for “we the people” to have the National Guard for protection during domestic disturbances as well as protection here or abroad as the federal government sees fit.

References:

http://www.heritage.org/constitution/#!/articles/1/essays/56/organizing-the-militia

Click to access lesson-6.pdf

US Constitution

The Power to Coin Money

 

“To coin money, regulate the value thereof, and of foreign coin*, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures**.” Article 1, Section 8, Clause 5 US Constitution

* Coinage Clause

There are two main elements to the Coinage Clause.

1. Under the Articles of Confederation, the power to coin money was shared between the federal government and the states. The Constitution grants the power to the federal government only for the purpose of creating a standardized money system and to reduce the cost of running mints.
2. Congress also has the power to set value of the coinage made at the federal mints and to set the value of foreign coins. The Congress has the power to set domestic coin value under the Articles, but it did not control the regulation of foreign money. The purpose of this control was to encourage domestic and foreign commerce.

The document is unclear as to whether the Congress has the power to issue paper money. At the time of the founding, the coins were actually made of precious metals and thus had a measurable value. Paper money is not directly backed by specie (from Latin “in specie”, which means “in kind or form”), which means that it is not necessarily backed by precious metals. With the passage of the Legal Tender Act of 1862, Civil War “greenbacks” were declared legal tender for all debts, public or private. This information is from Todd Zywicki, Foundation Professor of Law, George Mason University, per http://www.heritage.org.

In 1981, the management of the US Mints was placed under the direction of the Treasurer of the United States. There are five current facilities: Philadelphia, Denver, San Francisco, West Point, and Fort Knox.

We the people give Congress the power to produce money and determine its worth.

The benefit to we the people is that money has the same value and appearance throughout the country.

http://www.codigoflorestal.com

 

** Weights and Measures Clause

From the founding, there was no real controversy over the establishment of standards of weights and measures. The Articles of Confederation had granted Congress this power. The standards used were really carried over from the British Crown. To quote Eric A. Chiappinelli, Professor of Law, Creighton University School of Law, “There already existed a customary uniformity. Rather, the purpose in granting this power was to facilitate domestic and international commerce by permitting the federal government to adopt and enforce national measurement standards based upon the prevailing consensus. The clause excited no controversy among the Framers or in the ratifying conventions.”

In 1866, the Congress authorized the use of the metric system. Since 1975, the metric system has been the preferred system for trade and commerce. The National Institute of Standards and Technology of the Department of Commerce periodically publishes standards for English and metric weights and measures.

We the people give Congress the power to standardize weights and measures.

The benefit to us is that we have assurance that the values (example: a pound or a mile) will be standard throughout the country.

References:

Findlay, Bruce Allyn and Findlay, Esther Blair. Your Rugged Constitution. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1950

http://www.heritage.org

http://www.wikipedia.org

US Constitution

To Regulate Commerce

potcoplays.wikia.com

  “When those who are governed do too little, those who govern can- and often will- do too much.”
Second Inaugural Address as Governor of California, Sacramento, January 4, 1971

“To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;” Article 1, Section 8, Clause 3

The few words of the Commerce Clause have a tremendous impact on the power of the Congress to regulate and control international, interstate, and Indian Tribe activity. Since the clause is so broad and undefined, it lends itself to attempts at Congressional overreach of power. Through the years, this clause has been interpreted and re-interpreted many times by the Courts.

Commerce is defined as the buying and selling of goods on a large scale and between different places.

http://www.carseat.com

The first part of the clause “To regulate commerce with foreign nations” gives Congress complete and exclusive control over international commerce. This clause allows congress to pass import and export laws, to control the means of transportation of goods and services as well as communication about them, and to exercise control over the immigration process.

A positive aspect this power is that it helps to keep our commercial relationships with other countries uniform. As an example, it prevents individual states with seaports from setting their own rules, regulations, and fees.

Congress also deals with collection of tariffs on imported goods, protection from importation of diseased foods or other products, and prevention of exportation of materials that are necessary for production of goods within the United States (as in times of war).

We the people give Congress complete control over foreign commerce.

The benefit to we the people is:
• Government revenue and protection of home industries
• Safeguards to health
• Regulation of immigration
• Operation of seaports and airports
• Uniform regulation of international trade

The most controversial and often-discussed part of the clause is “to regulate commerce…and among the several States…” This is the regulation of interstate commerce; it goes hand-in-hand with Clause 1 of Section 8, the Spending (Tax and Spend) Clause. These powers have enabled our country to make the changes necessary to go from an agricultural nation to a large industrial nation. The powers enable the Congress to address problems on a uniform, national level.

commons.wikimedia.org

According to the Findlay’s in Your Rugged Constitution, the regulation of interstate commerce includes:
• All things that move among the states, including goods, persons, and words.
• The modes of transportation including railroads, airplanes, ships, express companies, and the waterways and airspace.

Interstate commerce refers to movement from state to state or through a state to get to another state. It also includes products that are made or mined in one state for use in another state. An example of this would be mining iron ore in Wisconsin for use in a steel mill in Illinois.

http://www.expediterworld.com

Interstate commerce law also restricts the states in that Congress may challenge laws or taxes established by a state unconstitutional in the Courts if they interfere with interstate commerce or regulation of commerce.

The third part of the clause “to regulate commerce…with the Indian tribes;” gives the federal government the power to communicate with and oversee the activities of Indian Tribes. This allows for uniform treatment via the federal government vs. potential inconsistency of laws between the states.

We the people give Congress the authority to regulate interstate commerce and supervise trade with Indian Tribes.

The benefit to we the people is:
• Free flow of goods among the states without tariffs
• Maintenance and supervision of transportation by water, land, and air
• Prevention of the movement of harmful goods into the country
• Protection of Indians from exploitation

This post discusses the way the Commerce Clause was viewed in our country before the 1930’s. After that time, the Courts allowed the congress to expand the power of the Commerce Clause many times. Most recently, this concern was addressed in the Supreme Court decision on the Affordable Care Act. In writing about this decision, Chief Justice Roberts shows how he managed to open the way for a push-back of the broad-reaching Congressional power via the Commerce Clause. In my next post, I will discuss some aspects of the historic changes to the Congressional power of regulating commerce over the last 80 or so years.

References:

Findlay, Bruce Allyn and Findlay, Esther Blair. Your Rugged Constitution. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1950

Hannaford, Peter. The Quotable Ronald Reagan. Washington, DC: Regnery Press, 1998

Webster’s Dictionary

US Constitution

I Will Gladly Pay You Tuesday…

“To borrow money on the credit of the United States;” Article 1, Section 8, Clause 2 US Constitution

Clause 2 of Article 1, Section 8 of the US Constitution is known as the Borrowing Clause.

This clause lends itself to broad interpretation. Alexander Hamilton used this clause to charter the First Bank of the United States. The original intent was for the federal government to have the power to borrow money quickly when it was needed for national defense. The Founders were very aware of the importance of maintaining good credit to allow for ease of borrowing. They also were conscious that money borrowed needed to be paid back, and they were careful to balance the budget so as not to impose heavy debt burdens on their children.

George Washington stated in his Farewell Address:
“As a very important source of strength and security, cherish public credit. One method of preserving it is to use it as sparingly as possible: avoiding occasions of expense by cultivating peace, but remembering also that timely disbursements to prepare for danger frequently prevent much greater disbursements to repel it; avoiding likewise the accumulation of debt, not only by shunning occasions of expense, but by vigorous exertions in time of peace to discharge the debts which unavoidable wars may have occasioned, not ungenerously throwing upon posterity the burden which we ourselves ought to bear.”

The Heritage Foundation via Claire Priest, Professor of Law, Yale University, “Because the Constitution imposes no express limits on the borrowing power, the political branches must decide the issue.”

In the Wikipedia article on the United States Public Debt (National Debt), the National Debt has two components:
1. Debt held by the public
a. Treasury securities held by those outside the government. This would be individuals,   corporations, the Federal Reserve System, and foreign, state, and local government.
2. Debt held by government accounts or intra-governmental debt
a. Non-marketable Treasury securities held in accounts administered by the federal government. These funds are owed to program beneficiaries such as the Social Security Trust Fund.

On April 2, 2013:
Debt held by the public = 11.959 trillion dollars
Intra-government holdings = 4.846 trillion dollars
Total Public Debt = 16.805 trillion dollars

In Jan. 2013, foreign investors held 47% of public debt. The Peoples’ Republic of China and Japan held 1.1 trillion each.

To see what 1 trillion dollars looks like, please see: http://www.pagetutor.com/trillion/index.html

It is a 1 followed by 12 zeroes: $1,000,000,000,000.

Here is a video to watch – you will laugh and feel less anxious about the National Debt.

We the people give Congress the power to borrow money as needed to carry on government affairs.

The benefit to we the people is that we have the services and protection of our government.

Please note that it continues to be very important that we pray for our leadership, that they will use sound judgment when handling money matters. It is unconscionable to leave the next generation with insurmountable debt. The current US debt is at the highest levels ever in the history of the US.

References:

Findlay, Bruce Allyn and Findlay, Esther Blair. Your Rugged Constitution. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1950

http://www.heritage.org

http://www.wikipedia.org

Enumerated Powers of Congress

“Government has an inborn tendency to grow. And, left to itself, it will grow beyond the control of the people. Only constant complaint by the people will inhibit its growth.”

Ronald Reagan, Address to the Comstock Club, Sacramento, August 6. 1973

Section 8 of Article 1 of the US Constitution assigns certain functions and powers to the Congress. This Section is commonly known as the Enumeration of Powers. Because this Section gives a list of the enumerated powers, I will cover some of the concepts needed to understand how the power structure works in the Congress. You may want to refer back to this post as we look at all the powers on the enumerated list.

Political power, within the concept of federalism, was divided between the two levels of government. The national government was to have limited and enumerated powers. The powers not given to the national government remained with the states as reserved power. Additionally, the national power was divided between the three branches of government with a system of checks and balances in place.

According to Dr. James McClellan in his book, Liberty, Order, and Justice, the powers of Congress can be classified as:

1. Enumerated or delegated – listed. The word delegated means that some of these were powers assigned by the states to the federal government.

2. Implied – expressed indirectly. This is done with the use of the “Necessary and Proper Clause”, which is also in Section 8. I will discuss it in a later post. This clause expands the enumerated powers of Congress. An example would be since Congress has the power to regulate interstate commerce, then it could make a law regulating shipping of materials from one state to another.

3. Prohibited – forbidden by authority

4. Inherited – powers inherited from the British Parliament and earlier state constitutions. (As in Article 1, Section 5, which is modeled after British Parliament with some important changes)

Following along with Dr. McClellan, the powers can be further divided into exclusive and concurrent. Exclusive means belonging only to the Congress (the power to declare war). Concurrent powers are powers shared with the Executive Branch or with the States. (Congress shares with the President the power to make war. It shares income tax power with the States.)

Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, John Jay – authors of the Federalist Papers

James Madison strongly believed in the importance of reserving as much power as possible to the States and to the people (we the people). Writing as Publius in Federalist 45, he writes:
“The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The former (federal powers) will be exercised principally on external objects as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce… The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the State.”

Overall, in Article 1, Section 8, we the people empower Congress with certain specified powers so that they can govern effectually.

The benefit to we the people is that we have a Congress strong enough to make decisions and govern, while at the same time limiting the powers of Congress by reserving numerous powers to the States and to the people.

In the next post, I will discuss Article 1, Section 8, beginning with Clause 1 to point out the benefits of the first principles in your life.

God bless you!

References:

Findlay, Bruce Allyn and Findlay, Esther Blair. Your Rugged Constitution. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1950

Hannaford, Peter. The Quotable Ronald Reagan. Washington, DC: Regnery Press, 1998

McClellan, James. Liberty, Order, and Justice. Indianapolis, Liberty Fund, Inc., 2000

Skousen, W. Cleon. The 5000 Year Leap. National Center for Constitutional Studies, 2006

How Does a Bill Become a Law?

I’m Just a Bill by kilroyart.deviantart.com

“Every Bill which shall have passed the House of Representatives and the Senate, shall, before it become a Law, be presented to the President of the United States; If he approve he shall sign it, but if not he shall return it, with his Objections to that House in which it shall have originated, who shall enter the Objections at large on their Journal, and proceed to reconsider it. If after such Reconsideration two thirds of that House shall agree to pass the Bill, it shall be sent, together with the Objections, to the other House, by which it shall likewise be reconsidered, and if approved by two thirds of that House, it shall become a Law. But in all such Cases the Votes of both Houses shall be determined by yeas and Nays, and the Names of the Persons voting for and against the Bill shall be entered on the Journal of each House respectively. If any Bill shall not be returned by the President within ten Days (Sundays excepted) after it shall have been presented to him, the Same shall be a Law, in like Manner as if he had signed it, unless the Congress by their Adjournment prevent its Return, in which Case it shall not be a Law.”  Article 1, Section 7, Clause 2

This is a rather long clause in the document.  This clause is called the Presentment Clause.  Apparently, the Founders wanted to spell out the details of this process so there would be few questions of their intention.

When a bill is presented in one of the Houses of Congress, it must pass that House and then be sent to the other house for another vote.  You may hear the term “bicameral” in speaking of the two houses.  This means that we have two houses involved in the legislative process.  If only one House was involved, the term used would be “unicameral”.

Following both Houses passing legislation, the bill goes to the President for his signature.  If he signs it, it becomes law.  If he does not sign it, he must return it to the House where it originated with his objections.  This information is to be entered into the Journal for that House.  If he does not sign the bill but returns it, this is known as a veto, although the word “veto” is not in the document.

The Congress may then reconsider the bill.  If it passes the House where it originated by a 2/3’s vote; it can then be sent to the other House where it will be reconsidered.  If it passes that House by a 2/3’s vote, it would become law.  These votes must be cast as “yeas or Nays” and the names of those voting for and against must be entered into the Journal.

If the President does not return the bill to either House within 10 days (not counting Sundays) then the bill would become law.

The very last phrase of this clause is what we commonly call the “Pocket Veto”.  This happens when the President holds the bill (puts it in his pocket), and Congress adjourns, thus preventing him from returning the bill.  The Congress has by its adjournment prevented the President from returning it.  That bill will not become law.  This phrase is known as the Pocket Veto Clause.

According to David Forte, Professor of Law, Cleveland-Marshall College of Law, there are three types of adjournments that the Congress can do:

1. Sine die – This is when Congress ends and the newly elected Congress will start a session.
2. Intersession – This is adjournment between two sessions of the same Congress.
3. Intra-session – This is when Congress takes a break within a session.

Much has been written and litigated about these different types of adjournment and whether or not certain pocket vetoes are valid.  It seems that the courts have generally upheld that a pocket veto can occur in any of these situations.   Today, when a President does a pocket veto, he does it with a “protective return” in case there is a question in the courts at a later date.

We the people give the President the right to approve or disapprove all bills.  We give the Congress the responsibility of coming up with a 2/3’s vote to override a Presidential veto.

The benefit to us is that we have checks and balances between both Houses of Congress and the executive.  This also prevents hasty action be either Congress or the Executive branch.

This is a video that will sum up this process for you:

References:

Findlay, Bruce Allyn and Findlay, Esther Blair. Your Rugged Constitution. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1950

www.wikipedia.com

www.heritage.org

Origination Clause

 

“All bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other bills.” Article 1, Section 7, Clause 1, US Constitution

The Origination clause allows the House of Representatives to introduce any bills that have to do with revenue. Revenue means money collected by a government (as taxes).

The Founder’s intention in making the decisions for taxes and collection of revenue to come from the House was that the Representatives are the closest to the people who elected them. They should be the most aware of the needs of the people. They would also then be directly accountable to the people for any unpopular taxes.

James Madison

As James Madison wrote in Federalist 58:
“The House of Representatives cannot only refuse, but they alone can propose the supplies requisite for the support of the government…. This power over the purse may, in fact, be regarded as the most complete and effectual weapon with which any constitution can arm the immediate representatives of the people, for obtaining a redress of every grievance, and for carrying into effect, every just and salutary measure.”

Some scholars feel that the fact that the Senate can make proposals for changes to these bills weakens the power of this function of the House.

The Senate in recent times has developed a procedure known as “gut-and-amend”. In this procedure, the Senate removes the content of the bill that was proposed and sometimes keeps the title. In this way, the content of the bill has come from the Senate instead of from the House. The content could have come via the Senate from appointees of the Executive branch (i.e. the Treasury Department).

An example of a bill that was put through “gut-and-amend” in the Senate was the Affordable Care Act, otherwise known as “Obamacare”.

Chief Justice John Roberts

Chief Justice John Roberts, in his opinion June 28, 2012 as to the constitutionality of the bill, opined that the mandate to purchase health insurance is indeed a tax.

“Such an analysis suggests that the shared responsibility payment may for constitutional purposes be considered a tax. The payment is not so high that there is really no choice but to buy health insurance; the payment is not limited to willful violations, as penalties for unlawful acts often are; and the payment is collected solely by the IRS through the normal means of taxation. Cf. Bailey v. Drexel Furniture Co., 259 U. S. 20, 36–37. None of this is to say that payment is not intended to induce the purchase of health insurance. But the mandate need not be read to declare that failing to do so is unlawful. Neither the Affordable Care Act nor any other law attaches negative legal consequences to not buying health insurance, beyond requiring a payment to the IRS. And Congress’s choice of language—stating that individuals “shall” obtain insurance or pay a “penalty”—does not require reading §5000A as punishing unlawful conduct. It may also be read as imposing a tax on those who go without insurance.”

There is a group called the Pacific Legal Foundation who is filing a lawsuit against the government over the Affordable Care Act saying that since the mandate is a tax, then the bill should have originated in the House and thus it is unconstitutional.

Please see the articles below for further information on the lawsuit based on the Origination Clause.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/mar/31/obamacare-lawsuit-over-health-care-tax-will-test-c/?page=1

http://www.humanevents.com/2013/04/02/the-lawsuit-that-might-kill-obamacare/

Under Article 1, Section 7, Clause 1, we the people gave the House of Representatives the authority to originate bills to raise money via taxes. The House of Representatives have the closest connection to the people.

The benefit to we the people is that we can hold our Representative accountable and either continue their office in the House, or remove them if we feel they are not handling taxation as we think they should.

References:

Findlay, Bruce Allyn and Findlay, Esther Blair. Your Rugged Constitution. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1950

http://www.heritage.org

http://www.wikipedia.com

Webster’s Dictionary

Compensation for Congress

“*The Senators and Representatives shall receive a Compensation for their Services, to be ascertained by Law, and paid out of the Treasury of the United States. **They shall in all cases except Treason, Felony, and Breach of the Peace, be privileged from arrest during their Attendance at the session of their respective Houses, and in going to and returning from the same; and ***for any Speech or Debate in either house, they shall not be questioned in any other Place.” Article 1, Section 6, Clause 1, US Constitution

* The Compensation Clause

The first part of this clause is known as the “Compensation Clause”. When the document was founded, there was discussion about whether or not the Representatives and Senators should be paid for service. There was concern that if they were not paid, they might be more likely to turn to corruption for compensation. As stated by Joseph Story in his Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States, “they might be compelled by their necessities, or tempted by their wants, to yield up their independence, and perhaps their integrity, to the allurements of the corrupt, or the opulent.”

As stated by Adrian Vermeule, John H. Watson, Jr. Professor of Law, Harvard Law School, “Thus, supporters of the federal legislative salary argued that providing no salary would not attract candidates motivated only by a sense of duty, but would instead permit only wealthy candidates, creating a de facto legislative plutocracy.”

So it was decided that they should be paid for their services. The additional question was from whom should they receive their pay. The Founders felt that if the individual states paid them, as they were paid under the Articles of Confederation, then they would be more dependent on the state, and less focused on federal issues. The Founders decided that they should be paid from the United States Treasury.

In more recent times, the question has been about pay raises. The Congress sets its own pay rate. The 27th Amendment makes it so that Congressional pay raises take place in the next term from when the pay raise was approved.

The current salary for a Senator or Congressman is $174,000. For the Majority and Minority Leader of each House the salary is $193,400. For the Speaker of the House, the salary is $223,500. For more information on the compensation for the Congress, please see: http://www.senate.gov/CRSReports/crs-publish.cfm?pid=’0E%2C*PL%5B%3D%23P%20%20

** Privilege from Arrest

The next part of this clause discusses the fact that the Congressperson is immune from arrest in civil matters while in session of Congress and when traveling to and from a session. This language was also used in the British Parliament. It was thought to be a way to prevent the executive branch from having a Member arrested who might be about to cast a vote against their wishes. However, according to David F. Forte, Professor of Law, Cleveland-Marshal College of Law, “The Supreme Court, applying the Framers’ intent, later declared that the clause also did not provide any privilege from civil process… Hence, civil litigants can compel Members of Congress to appear in a court of proper jurisdiction to defend against civil actions. Furthermore, the Court has so narrowly interpreted the clause that Members of Congress may even be compelled by subpoena to testify in criminal and civil actions while Congress is in session.”

*** Speech and Debate Clause

The third part of this clause is known as the Speech and Debate Clause. The purpose of this statement is to protect the independence of Congress when exercising the legislative responsibilities assigned to it by the Constitution. It would prevent a Congressperson from being charged with libel or slander while speaking in their House of Congress. However, the rules do not necessarily apply if the Congressperson was to publish this information in a place other than the Congress.

In Article 1, Section 6, Clause 1, we the people give your Congressperson:
• Salaries and other compensation
• Freedom from arrest while doing the work of the government
• Freedom from fear of charges of libel or slander or other charges while speaking in the Congress

The benefit to we the people is that the Congressperson can feel free to express their thoughts while doing the work we hired them to do as well as freedom from fear of being arrested to be prevented from speaking for the people who hired them.

References:

Findlay, Bruce Allyn and Findlay, Esther Blair. Your Rugged Constitution. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1950

http://www.heritage.org/constitution/#!/articles/1/essays/25/compensation-clause

http://www.heritage.org/constitution/#!/articles/1/essays/26/privilege-from-arrest

www. Wikipedia.com

How Often Should the Congress Assemble?

”The Congress shall assemble at least once every year, and such meeting shall be on the first Monday in December, unless they shall be law appoint a different day. US Constitution, Article 1, Section 4, Clause 2

This clause was changed by the 20th Amendment, Section 2. This states, “ The Congress shall assemble at least once in every year, and such meeting shall begin at noon on the 3rd day of January, unless they shall by law appoint a different day.”

This section was originally designed to make sure that the Congress met at least once per year. Prior to instituting the new Constitution, while still under the Articles of Confederation, the legislature decided to start the first session of the Congress under the new Constitution on March 4, 1789. This meant that every other year, the newly elected members would not take the oath of office until March. But the Congress was required to meet in December. This allowed a gap in time where a “lame duck” session of Congress could occur. Lame duck means that the Congress could meet and make laws with the people who had been voted out of office in November in attendance and voting.

Although Congress could have prevented this by passing a law to change the date, they instead proposed the 20th Amendment to wrap up any loose ends such as the fact that those in office when this change occurred would have their terms shortened by a few months and to keep the text of the Constitution consistent. The Amendment kept the requirement that the Congress meets at least once per year.

Lame duck sessions of Congress do still occur, but they are not “required” by the Constitution. The time frame of the lame duck session now could be from post-election November until Jan. 3rd every other year.

Currently, according the answers.yahoo.com, the Senate is in session over the last 9 years an average of 140 days per year, with the House in session an average of 130 days per year over the same time period.

The benefit to “we the people” is that Congress must assemble at least once each year to take care of legislative issues.  The second benefit is that the 20th Amendment shortened the potential amount of time for a lame duck session of Congress to occur.

“One thing our Founding Fathers could not foresee… was a nation governed by professional politicians who had vested interest in getting reelected. They probably envisioned a fellow serving a couple of hitches and the looking… forward to getting back to the farm.”

Ronald Reagan, Meeting the Students, taping for television, Sacramento, September 17, 1973

References:

Answer.yahoo.com

Findlay, Bruce Allyn and Findlay, Esther Blair. Your Rugged Constitution. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1950

Hannaford, Peter. The Quotable Ronald Reagan. Washington, DC: Regnery Press, 1998

US Constitution

Wikipedia, Article One of the United States Constitution

Holding Elections

“The times, places, and manner of holding elections for Senators and Representatives shall be prescribed in each state by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by law make or alter such regulations, except as to the places of choosing Senators.” US Constitution Article 1, Section 4, Clause 1

The States have the authority to determine “times, places, and manner” for holding elections. This includes the timing of primary elections. The State can also set the dates for voter registration before an election, the timing and regulations for petitions to put names on the ballot, and voting poll locations.

Another way that the States regulate the “manner” of elections is by using their power to draw election districts. The Congress does require that the States use a “single-member district scheme”. This means that the State is divided into as many election districts as there are Representatives allotted to that State. As an example, if a State has 12 representatives assigned to it; it would have 12 election districts. This eliminates the Representative being elected “at large” to represent the whole state. Representing a certain election district should increase the Representative’s accountability to their constituents.

The only time that the US Congress has “by law make or alter such regulations” was to set a date for the Federal elections as the Tuesday following the first Monday in November.

The phrase “except as to the places of choosing Senators” is considered a moot point since this referred to the time in history when the State legislatures chose the Senators for each State. This was changed by the 17th Amendment. For more information about the 17th Amendment, please see the post, “Establishment of the US Senate, March 7, 2013.

We the people give the States (with oversight by the federal government) the ability to set the dates and rules for elections.

The benefit to us is that there are laws and rules in place to keep the election process functioning each time it is necessary. Additionally, the individual States have, over the years, retained much of the authority as to how elections are conducted in their State.

References:

Findlay, Bruce Allyn and Findlay, Esther Blair. Your Rugged Constitution. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1950

US Constitution

Wikipedia, Article One of the United States Constitution