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?
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 ongoing financial crisis has made it apparent to nearly everyone that we must move the over-the-counter derivatives market from one that takes place under the table to one that happens out in the open.
We can fundamentally change some of this system to make it fairer, better, and more equitable.
Part of the question I have is something I hear from many of my constituents, particularly after the most recent financial crisis in the country; they ask the question why, after mistakes are made by people in various positions of…
We need to address this problem as part of our efforts to reform the financial system to ensure financial products are adequately examined and restore investor confidence.





