Replies

"Just mail the damn thing in and be done with it."

No, the President has the right to communicate the SOTU speech to all Americans via national broadcast, especially to the people who support him. I want to hear what he has to say...not have to read it on some website. Don't let the Democrats manipulate control of the event. Sending it in is what they want him to do.

Why do you think the President has the right to communicate the state of the union speech to all Americans via a national broadcast? There's nothing to that effect in the Constitution. The Constitution obligates the President to provide "information" to Congress, not the public. It does not give the President the obligation or even the right to provide that information in the form of a speech, and certainly does not obligate any television networks to broadcast such a speech.

Anyway, we were better off before Wilson revived the practice of treating this straightforward Constitutional obligation as an excuse for the President to deliver a speech from the throne as if he was a king. I hope this opportunity is taken to kill off state of the union addresses for good.

"Why do you think the President has the right to communicate the state of the union speech to all Americans via a national broadcast?"

Because it's called precedent, and whether you like it or not, no matter who sits in the White House, the standard practice of delivering the State of the Union live will be used to political advantage by both parties. Even if President Trump chose to send his speech to Congress, and not present it live, do you actually believe that the Democrats wouldn't make political hay out of it? And that given the opportunity, the next time one of theirs sits in the White House, that they wouldn't continue the practice to push their own political agenda?

POTUS has the same 1st Amendment right as anyone. He could deliver the info he is obliged to provide to Congress to the public if he so chooses. I don’t know if the Speaker has the right to prevent the appearance of POTUS, seems kind of odd but I am also not sure where such a dispute could be resolved. It’s between the two branches.

Personally, assuming she can keep the House chamber closed, I think he should plan to deliver it to the Senate, where I don’t think there is enough room for all the House of Representin’ members to sit - so the Senate can decide which House members to invite. This gives Speaker Botox the option whether to open the House and lose this round, or set a new precedent where the House is downgraded in esteem (also a loss for the Speaker) and she can watch the speech from her vacation home in Puerto Rico. POUTS simply sends the House a transcript of his speech on the Senate floor to meet the Constitutional requirement.