That is not quite the Shermanesque statement I had hoped to get from the majority leader. It seems to me the majority leader is saying that the 100 days is more important than allowing the membership to communicate with our constituents. We have given up the thought process in the House, we have given up our deliberative activity in the House. I do not think it is fair to the American people or the traditions of this institution to give up the ability to communicate with our constituents on weekends. Is there some magic in this 100 days that we could not continue and not have a 3-week break in April, and make it a 2-week break or a 1-week break so that we could continue over the period of March and April to communicate with our constituents?
Paul E. Kanjorski: “That is not quite the Shermanesque statement I had hoped to get from the majority leader. It seems to me the majority…”
Editor's note · Context
Addressing the importance of communication with constituents during a debate on the House schedule.
Share
More from Paul E. Kanjorski
The Republican plan that was put forward last week addresses various policies that put the taxpayer at risk, but has no bail-out in the future.
If Congress missteps, we run the risk of driving this market overseas and limiting the ability of companies to manage risks associated with their business practices.
I believe, in addition to empowering regulators with new and improved authority to watch over our Nation's financial health, we should also empower the owners of these companies to have more control and to align management interest with…
As most Members of this Chamber know, we recently lost a dear friend and colleague. Congressman Jack Murtha passed away on February 8 after complications from gallbladder surgery. Jack recently became the longest-serving Member of Congress…





