August 04, 2008
— Gabriel Malor Got an email this morning from AOSHQ reader Brennan:
People have been talking about the President calling Congress back to discuss gas prices for days now, using his powers in the Constitution. Rep. John Culberson (R-TX), however, Tweeted this last evening:"We would ask the Pres to call Congress into special session but the Senate used a sneaky trick to prevent this - they are still in session"
Is that legally the situation? Is President Bush unable to call Congress back (even the House) because the Senate is technically still in session?
What he describes---Congress not "officially" ending its session so as to prevent the President from doing something---has occurred several times before. Most recently, this past December, Senate Democrats left one member in Washington during the holiday break, who would call the chamber to order for a few minutes each day in order to keep President Bush from making recess appointments. (Democrats claimed it would also keep him from using a pocket veto, but that was not the case.)
Assuming Rep. Culberson is right about the Senate being in session, I think he's wrong about calling a so-called "special session." The Constitution says that the President "may, on extraordinary Occasions, convene both houses, or either of them, and in Case of Disagreement between them, with Respect to the Time of Adjournment, he may adjourn them to such Time as he shall think proper..." So whether the Senate is technically still in session or not, the President cannot be prevented from calling the House back. The House has never, in the history of the Republic, been called into extra session by itself. But there is no constitutional barrier that would prevent the President from issuing a Proclamation (the usual means of convening an extra session) calling them back.
Whether the Senate could be convened depends on whether it is in session. Culberson seems to think that Senate Democrats have technically kept that chamber in business. I'm not sure. By 48-40, the Senate voted to adjourn this past Thursday. It sounds to me like they're not in session. For what it's worth, the last time an extra session was called, President Truman reconvened the 80th Congress after it had adjourned to escape the heat of Washington in summer. Sounds familiar, no?
The real question is whether Congress has actually adjourned, or whether it has merely taken a "recess." If it's just a recess, I don't think the president can call them back.
Posted by: Gabriel Malor at
06:51 AM
| Comments (22)
Post contains 427 words, total size 3 kb.
Posted by: chad at August 04, 2008 07:00 AM (YICPL)
Let the Dems go back to their constituencies for a few weeks and get a real earful. The message is simple: Either sing another tune when they go back to "work," or they're out on their asses. Personal visits to Reps offices.
Posted by: mr.frakypants at August 04, 2008 07:05 AM (PonvG)
I think that not passing any appropriations, and going on vacation, without taking any action on the energy crisis choking our economy, should count as extraordinary Occasions.
But that's just me and my clingy nature.
Posted by: toby hussein 928 at August 04, 2008 07:17 AM (evdj2)
There IS something he COULD do to call them back, but Dubya has been horrific in his ability to properly use the medium that he needs to do this...
The media. Call a PRIMETIME presidential address. Lay it out there. FRY the Dems for their inaction. Demand, live on TV that they return from the recess (like a bunch of spoiled 4th graders) and Do Something instead of talking about it. Explain the legal wrangling he COULD do to force them back, but how theyve conspired to make sure this avenue was questionable at best.
The media wont cover this on their own so make them.
Might also serve as a good time to set his official record straight on other things as well...
Posted by: Clancy at August 04, 2008 07:20 AM (X+xFB)
Obama goes on a world tour.
Nancy goes on vacation
It's not just the immediate inconvenience of expense during summer, it's that this winter is predicated to be one of the very coldest on record. And there will be great suffering from our lack of supply because of Nancy's vacation and date book.
Posted by: maverick muse at August 04, 2008 07:33 AM (F1b/5)
Posted by: David at August 04, 2008 07:34 AM (L6HG8)
Posted by: Kevin at August 04, 2008 07:36 AM (OEF4E)
Posted by: Kevin at August 04, 2008 07:38 AM (OEF4E)
Posted by: J David at August 04, 2008 07:38 AM (GHwEW)
with Respect to the Time of Adjournment, he may adjourn them to such Time as he shall think proper..."
Can he officially adjurn them first and then call them back?
Posted by: Gunslinger at August 04, 2008 07:39 AM (7FA9S)
Talk about 'Marie Antoinette' Pelosi and her 'let them eat cake' attitude. Point out that the only thing standing in the way of American oil production is Congressional interference.
And, if it won't make a difference in oil prices, and if it won't make any difference for 10 years....WHY ARE THEY SO WORRIED ABOUT IT? Call their bluff-- lift the ban and we'll see what happens to oil prices in the next year.
Posted by: Stinky Esposito at August 04, 2008 07:39 AM (MMC8r)
Posted by: brak at August 04, 2008 07:44 AM (siWJo)
Anyway, I was digging around and it looks like at least one president (Andrew Johnson) called a special Senate session during a "recess" of the 40th Congress, so it looks like it doesn't matter whether the chamber is "adjourned" or "in recess."
Posted by: Gabriel Malor at August 04, 2008 07:57 AM (1Ug6U)
So lets say that Bush makes an address to the nation where he calls Congress back "into session" from their recess to address the energy crisis. Then, let's say that Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid have a joint press conference saying that they refuse to comply, because they are technically still in session, or whatever excuse they come up with.
The Democrats would be slaughtered in November.
Posted by: Adam R. at August 04, 2008 08:09 AM (2wtwA)
The Dems crapped on the USA citizens. Let that cook in the summer heat while Repubs bang the energy drum, if they're not stupid... doh!
I think it's more damaging to let it fester. I hope the Repubs take the time to pound them. I don't hope for much but i still get dissappointed often.
Posted by: TomJW at August 04, 2008 08:17 AM (xRCpL)
Would it be asking too much to have someone (anyone) in the administration debunk the Dem Hoax of suggesting that a "redistribution of windfall profits," and/or a "release of strategic oil reserves" will in anyway sustain a long term reduction in the price oil?
C'mon, George. You can do it. Yes we can!
Posted by: The Magical Mythical Properties of Botox at August 04, 2008 08:32 AM (zAvxs)
Posted by: mr.frakypants at August 04, 2008 08:54 AM (PonvG)
Fixed.
Posted by: IllTemperedCur at August 04, 2008 11:52 AM (Ds4I5)
Posted by: Dogstar at August 04, 2008 12:11 PM (6AcsH)
Unfortunately, the general public is more retarded than G. Bush. I can't see him being effective with an address while the American people are more concerned about getting a good deal on back to school supplies.
Posted by: Esteban at August 04, 2008 12:51 PM (X7Ey1)
Posted by: beijing escort at October 09, 2009 12:11 AM (GBMl3)
Posted by: shanghai massage at October 09, 2009 06:06 PM (eqMrT)
Powered by Minx 1.1.4-pink.
