Former U.S. House Speaker Newt Gingrich uses his latest Human Events column to argue against the prospect of a substantive “lame duck” congressional session after the November election.
Political observers have suggested that Democrats ? if rejected at the polls in November ? would return to Washington at the end of the year to enact legislation that would have no chance of passing in 2011. Gingrich looks to the historical example of the defeated Federalists of 1800 as he makes a case against such an underhanded ploy.
Are the Democrats about to make the same mistake the Federalists made?
Democratic leaders today have been sending clear signals that they are willing to use the lame duck session of Congress to pass the most unpopular and destructive parts of their agenda. Like the Federalists? actions in 1801, any attempt by the outgoing Congress to pass legislation they were unwilling to defend in an election would be an attempt to thwart the will of the people.
As destructive as the Democratic Congress and President Obama have been in the past 18 months, it is worth remembering that things could have been a lot worse if not for the vocal and consistent activism of the American people opposing the Democrats? radical agenda.
The Orwellian named Employee Free Choice Act, which would strip workers of the right to a secret ballot when deciding when to join a union, is not yet law.
The job killing energy tax ? or cap and trade ? passed the House but remains hung up in the Senate.
The Democrats have also not been able to pass an amnesty bill for illegal immigrants.
And let?s not forget that President Obama?s ?Deficit Commission? is expected to recommend tax increases, possibly in the form of a value added tax (VAT), that could raise the cost of everything Americans buy. Conveniently, the Commission will not report its findings until after the November 2nd elections, just in time for a lame duck Congressional session.
