THE CASE AGAINST LYNN JENKINS CHAPTER 55 - WHEN DIGGING HERSELF INTO A HOLE SHE KEEPS DIGGING AND ASKS YOU TO CONTRIBUTE YOUR MONEY TO THE NONSENSE

This is Lynn Jenkins, she does not represent us

Common Sense, and nearly every person you meet, will tell you to stop digging once you find yourself in a hole. Either no one told Lynn Jenkins about common sense or that she's dug herself into a hole. Instead of dropping the shovel and hollering for a ladder or a rope Jenkins decided to blame "liberals" for her confused idea about a statute to outlaw Lame Duck sessions of the Congress - any Congress.

Seriously, when I Googled the Unrepresentative from Kansas' Second Congressional District this is what I saw:

End the Lame Duck Session

Liberals are fighting my attempt to ban the lame duck session.

www.lynnjenkins.com  



That of course took me to a page where Lynn had the audacity to ask for more money. She gets tens of thousands of dollars from her connections with the  Koch's brothers, QC Holdings, and other FAT CAT BANKERS, ACCOUNTANTS, INSURANCE COMPANIES, AND WALL STREET INTERESTS. She'll neither get a vote nor a single cent from me.

Am I supposed to be this "liberal" of which her website speak?  On some things I am. I support equal pay for equal work, SCHIP, Health Care Reform, and a woman's right to choose. Then again I never saw a free trade agreement that didn't free up our markets to buy more cheap stuff, made by foreigners and putting Americans out of work that I liked. Nor do I think much of tax credits to big business for sending American jobs overseas. Jenkins keeps voting for those offshoring tax breaks.  When it comes to the Second Amendment I find myself strangely in the company of Sam Alito. I think owning a gun is a personal right guaranteed by the Second Amendment and that right can be made applicable to the States via the Incorporation Doctrine of the Fourteenth Amendment.

Lynn Jenkins just gets it wrong. It is not liberals who oppose her idea, it is reasonable persons who have taken the time to study the institution of the Congress and the Constitution. Jenkins will be opposed by those who know the distinctions between rules, statutes, and the Constitution.

The Constitution

Article I Section 4.

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.

The Congress shall assemble at least once in every year, and such meeting shall be on the first Monday in December, unless they shall by law appoint a different day.

20th Amendment - Amendment XX

Section 2.

The Congress shall assemble at least once in every year, and such meeting shall begin at noon on the 3d day of January, unless they shall by law appoint a different day.

The Twentieth Amendment struck out the language I underlined above from  Article I § 4 and replaced it with the language of § 2.

If the 72nd Congress, which proposed the Twentieth Amendment, and the States ratifying the Twentieth Amendment intended to terminate, rather than truncate, Lame Duck sessions then the language they presented would have been different.

Consider the original language of Article I § 3, which was redacted upon adoption of the Seventeenth Amendment. Here the framers told the first Senators to get themselves to Philadelphia to begin the first session of the First Congress and to do so immediately. If the powerhouse behind the Twentieth Amendment, Nebraska's Senator George Norris, wanted to kick the former Representatives and Senators out of office and let the new Congress begin, there was an example set by the Founding Fathers.

The Twentieth Amendment would then say that as soon as a quorum of both houses of the newly elected Congress has assembled, the former Congress will adjourn Sine Die. Immediately thereafter the next session of Congress will begin.

The problem is that isn't anything close to what the Twentieth Amendment says.

Lynn Jenkins is having this amazingly public brain fart saying that she can get done by statute what every other semi-educated person in America knows can only be accomplished by amending the Constitution.

This is not new stuff. The Supreme Court spoke to the issue in 1996. The case was United States v. Winstar Corp. 518 U.S. 839 where the history of this principle was discussed. The Court said:

In his Commentaries, Blackstone stated the centuries old concept that one legislature may not bind the legislative authority of its successors:

"Acts of parliament derogatory from the power of subsequent parliaments bind not. . . . Because the legislature, being in truth the sovereign power, is always of equal, always of absolute authority: it acknowledges no superior upon earth, which the prior legislature must have been, if it's [sic] ordinances could bind the present parliament." 1 W. Blackstone, Commentaries on the Laws of England 90 (1765)." (Emphasis added).

Did you get that? Lynn Jenkins cannot pass a law that binds future Congresses because the 112th Congress will be equal in sovereign power and absolute authority with the 113th Congress and each successive Congress to follow.

Make no bones about it the 112th Congress can adjourn Sine Die after the elections are over. The 112th Congress can move to make in order a new vote for Speaker of the House for the balance of the term of the first session of the 112th Congress. That way when the Democrats win Lynn Jenkins can make sure that the Democrats will rule in the waning hours of the 112th Congress and respect the will of the electorate. Lynn Jenkins' crazy idea that she can pass a law binding on future Congresses regarding Lame Duck sessions is just nonsense.

It is the kind of nonsense that has her asking for money from those who believe that liberals are attacking Jenkins. Well, Jenkins may not know much about Congress as an institution or the Constitution but she's a true disciple of P.T. Barnum. Yes Sir, there's a sucker born every minute! And Lynn is going after their cash!

And now Jenkins supports the new Tea Party notion of putting in a Constitutional jurisdictional statement for each new bill proposed in the 112th Congress.  Gosh, I can hardly wait.

END OF LIFE COUNSELING - THE TERM "DEATH PANEL" AS PURE PROPAGANDA - & THE ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM ABOUT WHOM NO ONE IS SPEAKING, THE LATE TERRI SCHAIVO.

The Grotesque Overtly Propagandizers (GOP) are renewing their bogus claims about "Death Panels" and the rationing of Medicare. The Department of Health and Human Services put the end of life counseling provision into the CFR.

The New York Times suggests that DHHS conducted a black ops manuver by inserting the end of life counseling provision into the CFR.  The New York Times report is based on an apparent e-mail from Oregon's Democratic Representative Earl Blumenaur, where he makes a gaff in telling his supporters to keep the unbroken news on the down low as not to inflame the passions of the GOP. Earl, always remember and never forget, we favor more speech over less speech, especially when we speak the truth.

The New York Times needs to get real. Tens of thousands of regulations routinely appear in the Code of Federal Regulation without the pomp and fanfare of a press release. The New York Times' conspiracy about non-disclosure of each item in the CFR makes them look more like the National Enquirer instead of a leader of the Fourth Estate. As Jed Clampett would say, "Pitiful, just pitiful."

The end of life counseling gives a person an opportunity to discuss how they want to go. If a person wants everything done to prolong their life, no matter what, then they get to have that put down. Their wishes will be followed. If a person says "don't keep me alive on those damn machines for any longer than a week, I don't want to be vegetable taking up space," then those wishes will be followed.

End of life counseling is about maintaining control of the dignity of life by assuring dignity in death. I have repeatedly told my daughter that if cold beer and ham sandwiches, placed in front of me, remain untouched for more than a day then she should tell the powers that be to pull the plug. They can harvest whatever organs are of use to others or science. Not everyone has had that talk with their loved ones.

Rather than just 'fess up about the last time the GOP dropped the ball by fighting science they Grotesquely and Overtly Propagandize over the so-called "Death Panels". Come on Republicans admit that a rational approach to death is not only wise and  prudent, it is a good thing.

The elephant in the room isn't the symbol of the GOP. The elephant in the room is the legal debacle left in the wake of Terri Schaivo's husband trying to follow her wishes and pull the plug so her brain dead carcass could be buried with dignity.

She didn't get her wishes followed. She got a bunch of religious fanatics, resembling a parade from the Dark Ages, telling her poor grieving family that each autonomic nervous flinch in her failing body was proof that Terri was alive and viable. In my world view science and faith inform one another.  Unfortunately the opposite view took hold in the case of Terry Schaivo. Her family deserved more than the media-political driven load of manure that was dropped on them.

Remember what happened? Congress waded into the tragic circumstances of this brain dead woman, pretending to fight for life, and got the federal courts involved to save her life, a life which was already gone. Despite the efforts of a Republican Congress and a Republican President and his Republican Governor brother, the court's operated as they were intended to function. In the end the plug was pulled. An autopsy settled the debate. Terry Schaivo's brain was shrunken to about the size of a grapefruit - it no longer functioned. She was brain dead.

End of life counseling isn't about the government telling Grandma when she has to die. End of life counseling gives the dying person the comfort of knowing that their passing will be as peaceful as possible, to them and to those they leave behind.

I have seen a lot of death. I have it seen it in the Emergency Room. I have seen it in the Operating Room. I have seen it in hospital rooms and on city streets.  I have been present in the face of death.

A sentiment all who face the Grim Reaper will share is that we don't want anyone selling tickets to the event. Neither do we want the meter on life's expenses to continue running after we have left our shriveling bodies in our journeys to the Great Beyond. Absolutely we don't want politicians, lawyers, judges, and especially not persons on radio and television pretending to be journalists making a circus of our demise.

End of life counseling is a good idea, preparing a Living Will is a good idea.  Talk to your family and loved ones about what you want done when the times comes.  Write those wishes down on paper and sign the thing.  Don't listen to propaganda.  Don't fear the Grotesque Overtly Propagandizers, neither listen to them.  You can always change the radio dial or turn off television's FOX FEARMONGERING. 

May I suggest a good book instead? 

UNEMPLOYMENT REMAINS HIGH - BIPARTISAN HOUSE VOTES FOR BILLS ENACTING A "MAKE IT IN AMERICA" STRATEGY - BILLS DIE IN SENATE - THE SENATE MUST VOTE TO CHANGE ITS RULES SO AMERICA CAN GET BACK TO WORK

Among the slew of legislation which died the stagnant death of inaction in the Senate two bills emerged from the House of Representatives in the 111th Congress that, in ordinary times, look like they'd get a huge chunk of Republican votes. These bills got those GOP votes in the House. Putting people back to work isn't, or at least it ought not, be a partisan idea. In the marketplace of ideas there is plenty of turf to wage the political tug of war while putting American workers back to work making things in America.

House Democrats had a plan which they called the "Make it in America" strategy. Making things in America, enhancing the manufacturing base in the nation, putting American workers back into American jobs, what could be so controversial about this idea?

H.R. 3116, the Berry Extension Act and H.R. 2039, the Congressional Made In America Promise Act each passed the House and each died in the Senate. Meanwhile, unemployment continues at unacceptable levels.

The Associated Press reported on December 28th that "[t]he Economic Policy Institute, a Washington think tank, says American companies have created 1.4 million jobs overseas this year, compared with less than 1 million in the U.S. The additional 1.4 million jobs would have lowered the U.S. unemployment rate to 8.9 percent, says Robert Scott, the institute's senior international economist. American jobs have been moving overseas for more than two decades. In recent years, though, those jobs have become more sophisticated — think semiconductors and software, not toys and clothes."

Read their article at: http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5iFY0R9agrMVljqtaB6ccsILSKd3Q?docId=771fbe245e624cbd95ab5a49122dd701.

Think software, not toys and clothes. That means the lower paying jobs are now offshore and the higher paying jobs are following suit. No one on Capitol Hill should look or sound like they are surprised. This is the exact evil that the Democrats Make it in America strategy was designed to combat. House Republicans voted FOR these bills.

The Senate secretly suffocated them in committee. This is a prime example of why the arcane rules of the Senate regarding filibuster and holds must be changed. A minority of one Senator can keep the business of the Senate held hostage and that Senator need not face the glare of public scrutiny because of the overt lack of transparency in the Senate.

H.R. 3116, the Berry Extension Act was introduced by North Carolina Democratic Representative Larry Kissell. Kissell is a member of the House Trade Working Group recently came out against the proposed Korea - U.S. Free Trade Agreement. He said: "We must close the loopholes and incentives for companies to ship jobs overseas, and give our small businesses and manufacturers the fair opportunities they deserve to export their products made here,” said Kissell. “While I and many of my colleagues offered our suggestions and the changes our constituents would like to see in this deal, unfortunately not enough has been done to help protect American jobs."

According to the Congressional Research Service H.R. 3116 would amend the Homeland Security Act of 2002 to prohibit the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) from procuring specified covered items directly related to national security interests (including clothing, tents, or natural fiber products) that are not grown, reprocessed, reused, or produced in the United States, except to the extent satisfactory quality and sufficient quantity of any such product cannot be procured as and when needed.

Kissell is saying that we can grow cotton and turn it into fabric in America. North Carolina used to be a leading center in textile production. As labor made inroads into North Carolina's textile mills the owners of those enterprises began shifting those jobs overseas. That was in the 1980's and 1990's. This is not a new strategy for the mill owners. A century earlier they found cheap labor in the Carolinas and moved the mills down South from New England.

Note to the President: All Free Trade Agreements must include requirement that the other county permit collective bargaining. When we ship our labor organizers to the places our jobs go then we get to level the playing field. When Third World nations start paying their workers what they're worth the incentive to ship American jobs to those nations fades.

H.R. 3116 did not face strong opposition in the House. H.R. 3116 did not face weak opposition in the House. H.R. 3116 was passed on a motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, which of course means that it needed a ⅔ majority to succeed. Not only did no House Republican rise in opposition to the bill, neither was there a call for a Roll Call vote. The list of 69 cosponsors included both Democrats and Republicans. A telling remarks about the fate of the bill was made by Representative Kissell when the bill was being discussed on the floor. He said:

"In January of 2009, shortly after I was sworn in as a freshman Congressman, folks came to me and asked me if I would help extend the Berry Act in homeland security to just the TSA part. Now, I could not understand why this had not been done before, but I was assured it had been tried and had been unsuccessful because there was apparently a lot of special interest that was in opposition to this.

Having worked 27 years in textiles myself, I gladly took on this initiative, and with a lot of help, we were able to overcome the special interest, and we were able to get the extension of the Berry Act to the amendment for the Recovery Act applying just to TSA. We immediately went to work to introduce a bill of legislation that would complete this process by making all of Homeland Security very compliant."

The House of Representatives was able to overcome those special interests. In the Senate the heavy hand of special interest money need only persuade one Senator to kill a bill. We don't know how many Senators actually opposed the bill. We know that the bill died a secret death. Senate Rules must change if America is to move forward.

The House, in the first session of the 112th Congress, led by Republicans can pass this bill again, by a ⅔ majority, and send it to the Senate. Senate Democrats need to change the Senate Rules so that bills like H.R. 3116 can die a public death. Senators killing bills that keep America working can then be voted out of office.

Of course, if the Senate has to conduct the nation's business in public it is likely that bills like H.R. 3116 won't die in committee.

H.R. 2039, the Congressional Made In America Promise Act was introduced by Ohio's Democratic Representative Marcy Kaptur. The bill had 22 cosponsors of both parties. This bill is a no-brainer, nonetheless 36 Members voted against it. The lone Democrat voting against the bill was Colorado's Jared Polis. Polis, who usually makes good choices in the Congress got this one wrong. The vote was Roll Call number 521 where the margin was 371 in favor to 36 opposed, with 25 Members not voting.

Simply put the bill applies the Buy American Act to both houses of the Congress. The Congressional Research Service's summary says this bill amends the Buy American Act to apply Buy American requirements to articles, materials, and supplies acquired for the use of any legislative branch office, including the House of Representatives and the Senate, in the same manner as the Act applies with respect to articles, materials, and supplies acquired for the use of a department or independent establishment.

Prescribes a special rule in the case of any product which bears a congressional official insignia (including a mark resembling an official seal) that is acquired for the use of a legislative branch office. Prohibits the head of such office from making a determination under the Act that: (1) it is inconsistent with the public interest to enter into a contract in accordance with the Act; or (2) an article, material, or supply is not mined, produced, or manufactured in the United States in sufficient and reasonably available commercial quantities and of satisfactory quality.

Applies this prohibition to otherwise exempted manufactured articles, materials, or supplies procured under any contract the award value of which is less than or equal to the micro-purchase threshold.

These two bills are easy. They each got wide bi-partisan support in the House. This isn't the heavy lifting required to roll back tax breaks for shipping our American jobs overseas. These two bills are easy. If Senate Rules don't change then America may get stuck in this prolonged unemployment. That is unacceptable. Urge your Senators to vote, on the first day of the 112th Congress, to change the Senate Rules.

NEWLY ELECTED REPUBLICANS IN THE HOUSE ARE PRETENDING TO BE THE "NEW AMERICAN MAJORITY" BY HONKERING DOWN WITH THE OLD GUARD - CHANGE YOU CAN DISBELIEVE IN

A new beast is on the streets of the nation's capitol prowling for funds to sate the appetite of incoming Republican Members of Congress for campaign cash. America's New Majority PAC was formed November 16, 2010. According to FEC filings their address was 2150 River Plaza Drive, Suite 150 Sacramento, California. That, amazingly, is the address of JEFF PAC, but more on that later

The e-mail contact for America's New Majority PAC, on the FEC filings is David@the agency.us. Don't go getting all conspiratorial about this. The agency in this case is not "the Agency" or the CIA as your fears may suggest. No this is the unique web address for the Wayne Johnson (not John Wayne) agency out in California.

According to their FEC filings America's New Majority's function is that "[t]his committee collects contributions, pays fundraising expenses and disburses net proceeds for two or more political committees/organizations, at least one of which is an authorized committee of a federal candidate."

The first campaign committee, and the only one on the original filings, associated with America's New Majority is the Denham for Congress Committee. That is Jeff Denham, of JEFF PAC, the newly elected Republican Representative to California's 19th Congressional District. Incumbent Republican Representative George Radanovich announced his retirement December 29, 2009.

Denham, who enters Congress with not only his own PAC, JEFF PAC, but also his own Joint Fundraising Committee, America's New Majority, defeated Democratic candidate Lorain Goodwin. In that race Denham raised $1,241,895, spent $1,176,631, and ended up with $63,561. Goodwin raised $44,492, spent $46,862, which left her in the hole to the tune of $2,370.00. She should be having a debt retirement party, but campaign finance doesn't reward the losers.

In what appears to be a glaring error in the original filing paperwork with the FEC America's New Majority answered question 6 " Name of Any Connected Organization, Affiliated Committee, Joint Fundraising Representative, or Leadership PAC Sponsor" with the answer "None". Now remember that Jeff Denham, of JEFF PAC, and also of Denham for Congress signed this paperwork.

An amended Statement of Organization was filed December 10, 2010. There are some insightful changes as to the nature of the beast. The e-mail for the contact person has changed to kdavis@hdafec.com. That is the e-mail address for Keith A. Davis, a partner in the political accounting firm of Huckaby Davis Lisker. Keith A. Davis is the new treasurer of America's New Majority.

On the amended filing more Congressional campaign committees joined the list as participants in joint fundraisers, they are: Friends of Scott DeJarlais, Dold for Congress, and Renee Ellmers for Congress Committee, , Landry for Louisiana, Marino for Congress, Tom Reed for Congress, David Rivera for Congress, Jon Runyon for Congress Inc., Southerland for Congress, Stutzman for Congress, Yoder for Congress, and JEFF PAC.

Okay, so besides Jeff Denham who are these new Republicans trying to fly deftly in the fine print beneath the radar screen? Steve Southerland is the Republican Representative-elect from Florida's 1st Congressional District. Robert Dold is the Republican Representative -elect from Illinois' 10th Congressional District. Marlin Stutzman is the Tea Party loser to Republican Senator-elect Dan Coates of Indiana, and the man who won for the Republicans the Congressional race in Indiana's 3rd Congressional District. Stutzman succeeds disgraced Republican Representative Mark Souder who admitted to hanky panky with a female staffer. Kevin Yoder is the Republican Representative-elect from Kansas' 3rd Congressional District. Jeff Landry is the Republican Representative-elect from Louisiana's 3rd Congressional District. Renee Ellmers is the Republican Representative-elect from North Carolina's 2nd Congressional District. Jon Runyon is the Republican Representative-elect from New Jersey's 3rd Congressional District. Tom Reed is the newly elected Republican Member of Congress for New York's 29th Congressional District. Reed won a special election and took office in November. Tom Marino is the Republican Representative-elect for Pennsylvania's 10th Congressional District. Scott DesJarlais is a medical doctor and Republican Representative-elect from Tennessee's 4th Congressional District. David Rivera is the Republican Representative-elect from Florida's 25th Congressional District.

America's New Majority has put together a gala courtesy of the Hammond Group's Tom Hammond and Meredith Hurt. This extravaganza will feature "Special Music Performance by Grammy Award Winner Leann Rimes" at the "Hotel W" in D.C. on January 4, 2011. The event is "Presenting Speaker Designate John Boehner, Majority Leader Elect Eric Cantor, Majority Whip Elect Kevin McCarty and NRCC Chairman Pete Sessions." The invitation may be viewed on the Sunlight Foundation's Party Time page: http://politicalpartytime.org/party/24189/#invite.

Jeff Denham, Steve Southerland, Robert Dold, Marlin Stutzman, Kevin Yoder, Jeff Landry, Renee Ellmers, Jon Runyon, Tom Reed, Tom Marino, and Scott DesJarlais represent change that does not change. They have managed to honker down with the business as usual crowd of old school Republicans, the firm of Huckaby Davis Lisker.

It may be easier to answer the question of who in Republican circles Huckaby Davis Lisker doesn't represent. These are the people who keep the books on the GOP's movers and shakers. They are currently the accounting firm for the Republican Congressional Campaign Committee. For Campaign 2010 the NRCC paid Huckaby Davis Lisker $230,307 for compliance consulting, according to OpenSecrets.com. See, http://www.opensecrets.org/parties/expenddetail.php?cmte=NRCC&txt=Huckaby+Davis+Lisker&cycle=2010.

Now, remember that Huckaby Davis Lister's Keith A. Davis, the treasurer of America's New Majority, replaced Christopher T. Parana as treasurer at the NRCC following a financial scandal.

Politico reported in 2008 that "Parana took over from Christopher J. Ward as the committee treasurer in 2007, according to other FEC filings. Ward is at the center of an internal investigation stemming from a forged audit the committee sent Wachovia, its principal lender during the 2006 election cycle. The committee has alerted the FBI about the irregularities, but many details of the investigation remain unknown."

Keith Davis was also the assistant treasurer for President George Herbert Walker Bush's two presidential campaigns. He worked on President George W. Bush's campaign in 2004. He has also advised former Texas Senator Phil Graham, Arizona Senator John McCain, along with numerous Republican House members, Arkansas' Mike Huckabee, and Republican PACs.

If you are going to change the way Washington is doing business then you have to change the persons and firms with whom you are doing business in Washington. As the old adage says "birds of a feather will flock together" and these new Republicans are showing that they flock with the likes of the entrenched business as usual crowd.

The American people are shifting paradigmatically. They want government to work for them, not the special interests. Our elected officials, resembling the tail of a comet, are lagging far behind in outer space. When candidates run on issues of change only to honker down at the same feeding trough where their predecessors fattened up, then change is not forthcoming.

Huckaby Davis Lister is a premiere accounting firm on the Republican side of the equation. They deal in compliance. They have won an Aristotle, as Oscar-like award for excellence given out by the American Association of Political Consultants. The Democrats have winners too. Xavier Martinez of Martinez & Associates in Escondido, CA and Brett Smiley of Campaign Finance Officers, LLC from Providence, RI took home Aristotles for their work on behalf of Democrats.

Working within the system is only defensible as an element of change when the elected politician actively works to change the system. The biggest problem we face in Congress today is the corrupting influence of excessive campaign cash being made available by corporate interests, fuzzy PACs, Joint Fundraising Committees, and Dark Interests which evade any real accountability.

Corporations do not have a soul to save, a butt to kick, or a vote to cast. Corporations should have no voice in the election of state or federal officials. The only persons who should be allowed to contribute to political campaigns are registered voters. When we get a Constitutional Amendment making that the law of the land then you will see change.

THOUGHTS ON CONGRESSIONAL REDISTRICTING AND GERRYMANDERING

Watch the legislatures of the several States now that redistricting is afoot! The Cook Political Report recently made public a couple of charts that reflect political volatility in the marketplace of partisan ideas and ideologies.

Cook's first chart, the 2012 COMPETITIVE HOUSE RACE CHART, lists by party those districts and Members of Congress vulnerable to being picked off. Cook lists three categories, likely, lean, and toss up, for each party. The second chart is Cook's report on HOUSE MEMBERS WHO WON WITH 55% OR LESS.

Missouri, known for being a traditional bell weather state has one District listed as "Lean Democratic" by Cook. That is Missouri's Third Congressional District which Cook gives a Partisan Voting Index (PVI) of D+7.

In Missouri three Members of Congress won their 2010 races with 55% or less of the vote. Kansas City's Emanuel Cleaver held off his Republican opponent Jacob Turk to win a fourth term. This will be Cleaver's fourth term. He has now defeated Turk three times. Cleaver's winning percentage in 2010 was 56.1% The Cook PVI for the Fifth Congressional District in Missouri is D+10.

Republican Vicky Hartzler bested long time Democratic Representative Ike Skelton to win her first term in Congress. Republican redistricting efforts paid off for them in Missouri. I recall when Missouri's Fourth Congressional District was a small pocket of counties immediately to the East and South of Kansas City's Jackson County. Missouri's Fourth Congressional Index has a PVI of R+14.

Today the Fourth Congressional District goes deep into the heart of Southwest Missouri. It includes places like Lebanon, Missouri which used to be in the Seventh Congressional District. The Seventh Congressional District is a Republican Stronghold having produced Representatives Roy Blunt, Gene Taylor, and Durwood G. "Doc" Hall.

Russ Carnahan has been the Democrat representing Missouri's Third Congressional District since 2005. After Dick Gephardt retired Carnahan won the seat in 2004. This will be Carnahan's fifth term. He squeaked by his Republican opponent, Edward Martin, Jr., with a winning percentage of 48.9%. The last time the district lines changed in Missouri was 2003.

The Census Bureau has made available an online map to let you see which states will gain seats and which states will lose. It is located at: http://2010.census.gov/2010census/data/.

Missouri is going to lose a seat in Congress after the redistricting dust settles. This will set up a contentious redistricting between the Governor, Democrat Jay Nixon, and his Republican controlled legislature. You can bet that in Missouri Republicans will want to continue whittling away at Democratic districts. Nixon will try to shave Republican areas back from seats currently held by Democrats.

The process will be more complicated in other states such as Arizona and Texas. These states have both the legislatures and the executive offices controlled by Republicans. Their dilemma is that each have to add seats and how do they splinter the vote so that the newly districts created are not Democratic? Much of the calculus for the population increase in these states is attributable to Hispanic voters, primarily non-Cuban Latinos. Due to the harshness of the Republican stance on Latinos, especially in these two states, drawing those lines will be difficult.

The Gerrymander

Expect to hear much discussion in the next two years about Gerrymandering. That is the process of drawing district lines to maximize your party's dominance and minimize the oppositions chances at being elected. The term originated in 1812 after redistricting in Massachusetts resulted in a district somewhat resembling a salamander. The name of the Governor, Elbridge Gerry, combined with the reptile to give the process a name.

About.com provides an excellent tutorial for those wanting to learn more about the process of Gerrymandering. Read it online at: http://geography.about.com/od/politicalgeography/a/gerrymandering.htm.

Christmas Bells by Henry Wadsworth Longfellow

Henry Wadsworth Longfellow wrote the poem "Christmas Bells" just months before General Robert E. Lee surrendered to General Ulysses S. Grant at the Courthouse in Appomattox, Virginia, ending the United State's Civil War.


Longfellow's son Charles had been injured in the Civil War fighting for the Union.  As Longfellow accompanied his son home to Massachusetts from Washington, D.C. he wrote this poem. 

Christmas Bells

by Henry Wadsworth Longfellow

I heard the bells on Christmas Day

Their old, familiar carols play,

And wild and sweet

The words repeat

Of peace on earth, good-will to men!

And thought how, as the day had come,

The belfries of all Christendom

Had rolled along

The unbroken song

Of peace on earth, good-will to men!

Till ringing, singing on its way,

The world revolved from night to day,

A voice, a chime,

A chant sublime

Of peace on earth, good-will to men!

Then from each black, accursed mouth

The cannon thundered in the South,

And with the sound

The carols drowned

Of peace on earth, good-will to men!

It was as if an earthquake rent

The hearth-stones of a continent,

And made forlorn

The households born

Of peace on earth, good-will to men!

And in despair I bowed my head;

“There is no peace on earth,” I said;

“For hate is strong,

And mocks the song

Of peace on earth, good-will to men!”

Then pealed the bells more loud and deep:

“God is not dead, nor doth He sleep;

The Wrong shall fail,

The Right prevail,

With peace on earth, good-will to men.”

THE CASE AGAINST LYNN JENKINS CHAPTER 54 - HER BEST IDEA IS THE LAST THING SHE HEARD

This is Lynn Jenkins, she does not represent us

Lynn Jenkins isn't a very good student of the institutions of Congress, in general, nor of the House of Representatives in particular, and that goes double for the Constitution. She recently demonstrated her lack of acuity in understanding the historical perspective upon which the Twentieth Amendment to the United States Congress was made.

The Google is such a wonderful thing. I am amazed that more politicians don't use it to find factual footing before inserting their proverbial foot into their endlessly propaganda spewing mouth. I am really amazed that Lynn Jenkins doesn't use the Google before saying silly things.

In a recent Tweet Jenkins said she plans to introduce legislation that will outlaw lame duck sessions of the Congress. Gosh, Jenkins doesn't know much about the Constitution. You see the dates of the terms of the Congress are not set in statute. They are set in the Constitution. Article I §4 originally read:

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 chusing Senators.

The Congress shall assemble at least once in every Year, and such Meeting shall be on the first Monday in December, unless they shall by Law appoint a different Day.

Yes that is the way the verb "to choose" was conjugated by the founders.  I can't wait for the debate on original intent to hit America's grammar books!

The underlined portion of the original language was redacted when the Twentieth Amendment to the Constitution was ratified in 1933. The pertinent part of that Amendment reads: "The Congress shall assemble at least once in every year, and such meeting shall begin at noon on the 3d day of January, unless they shall by law appoint a different day."

Jenkins doesn't appear to understand why the Twentieth Amendment changed the time for beginning a session of Congress. She should really learn how to use the Google. But then you can lead certain Members of Congress to facts but you can't get them to engage in critical thinking.

An excellent thumbnail of the whys and how comes behind adoption of the Twentieth Amendment was written by Mary Cornelia Aldis Porter and published by Answers.Com in a piece apparently underwritten by West Law. These are all good sources which Jenkins should start using. You can read it at: http://www.answers.com/topic/amendment-xx-to-the-u-s-constitution.

Ms. Porter explains that the "Norris Lame Duck" amendment was adopted because it was no longer necessary to have an extra long period of time for newly elected members to travel from their home districts to Washington, D.C. Development of railroads substantially shortened travel time.

Prior to rail travel being available it took weeks, if not months, for the new members to reach the nation's capitol. After rail travel was available the Members of Congress who were not re-elected tended to serve out their terms engaging in obstructionist activities and filibusters. Oddly enough, this is what Lynn Jenkins and the Party of No did throughout the majority of the 111th Congress.

Congress could not pass a law mandating the change to the start of Congress because of Article I §4 of the Constitution. Those in the first session of the 72nd Congress realized this and the Twentieth Amendment passed each chamber of that Congress by a ⅔ majority. It took less than a year for the States to ratify the Twentieth Amendment.

Jenkins would incorrectly have us believe that the Twentieth Amendment passed so that defeated majorities could not pass last minute legislation which in-coming majorities oppose. As usual, Jenkins gets it completely backwards. Prior to passage of the Twentieth Amendment lame duck sessions stalled the people's business. The 111th Congress' lame duck session advanced the people's business.

The Twentieth Amendment is often called the "Norris Lame Duck Amendment" after Nebraskan George William Norris who served five terms in the House as a Republican, four terms in the Senate as a Republican, and a final Senate term as an Independent. Norris was a Progressive, what we now call a Teddy Roosevelt Republican. He also was a proponent of abolishing the electoral college in favor of direct voting for President by the people. Norris led the efforts at bringing electricity to rural America with the REA. George William Norris was one of the great Americans profiled by John F. Kennedy in the book Profiles in Courage.

A statue of Senator George Norris in McCook, Ne.

Lynn Jenkins' knee jerk Tweet was inspired by a Washington Post article which cites John Copeland Nagle, a University of Notre Dame law professor as saying the activity of the 111th's lame duck session is exactly what the Twentieth Amendment was meant to prevent. Nagle gets it wrong, and Jenkins can do better than rely on the Washington Post for inspiration on new bills to be introduced. See, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/12/17/AR2010121703572.html.

In a classic case of mixing his applesauce with his chicken manure Nagle appears to be fantasizing that the Twentieth Amendment intended to truncate the role of the Legislative Branch of the American Government in much the way a vote of "no confidence" causes a collapse of  government in the British Parliamentary way of governing. Nagle is considered an expert because his theories are published in a law review journal, See, "A Twentieth Amendment Parable." New York University Law Review 72 (May). Of course, it is possible that Nagle has been taken out of context, that seems to happen all too frequently these days.

Suggesting that the Congress should stand down after an election is a dangerous interpretation. It is inconceivable to say that the Legislative Branch should be inactive from November until January following each Congressional election.

The Washington Post article, by David Fahrenthold seems to be weak on research. It would not have taken a Herculean effort to get a better historical perspective by Farenthold. An article in the Atlantic by Garrett Epps published July 23, 2010 speaks directly to the sort of danger that could come from Nagle's interpretation as reported by Farenthold and which Lynn Jenkins (whose best idea appears to be the last thing she heard) picked up. Epps is also a law professor. He teaches at the University of Maryland and once worked as a reporter for the Washington Post.

Epps argues that "There's no way to ban lame-duck sessions altogether, and we shouldn't. What if Pearl Harbor had happened on December 7, 1940, instead of 1941? Should the government have to wait a month to declare war on Japan? In a genuine crisis, even a lame duck impeachment might be proper. (Draw your own conclusions about Clinton's case.)" Bill Clinton was impeached in a lame duck session, and John Boehner voted for that impeachment even though the will of the American electorate had spoken. See, http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2010/07/its-not-dead-its-only-lame-john-boehner-and-the-20th-amendment/60404/.

I can't wait to read the bill Lynn Jenkins plans to introduce in Congress banning lame duck sessions. With bated breath I will linger for her to explain how she can magically transform the law of the land to do by statute what the 72nd Congress, a true statesman - Senator George William Norris, and everyone else with half a brain understands.  THE CONSTITUTION CHANGES BY AMENDMENT NOT BY STATUTE. 

Of course if John Boehner, Lynn Jenkins, and the Party of No want to adjourn the Congress Sine Die after the Republicans are soundly thrashed in the 2012 elections, or move to make the Minority Leader the interim Speaker of the House for the balance of their term, then they can give existential import to this confused thinking about how sessions of Congress ought to conclude. In the meantime I will just enjoy this little holiday gift from Jenkins.