This, to me, seems like Congress thinking they're more important than they are. I mean, we really don't need Congress passing laws should something horrible happen. Daschle is proving how irrelevant they are.
Anyway, I sent an email with the following in it to John McCaslin:
Why does Congress have to 'meet' anywhere? It would seem with the advent of the 'Net, we have a great reason to send Congress home permanently.
Each member could work from within an office in their State House and meet via Web Conferencing. All of their legislation can be passed via the web as well. And think of the money we would save on travel and for our reps having to pay for two homes.
And if they wanted to go see other members in other states, they could, on their dime.
To: dyed_in_the_wool
Anyone that dont believe Congress is covered and protected is living in a dream world.Those people have acess to and nothing but the best protections.There may be a few not in the loop but you can bet the big names are covered.
2 posted on
09/16/2002 9:04:03 AM PDT by
gunnedah
To: dyed_in_the_wool
Not to mention how many interns might be saved.
3 posted on
09/16/2002 9:05:27 AM PDT by
maxter
To: dyed_in_the_wool
More than a year after September 11 and there are still no plans to ensure that Congress could function following a terrorist attack.Some of us question how well they function now!
5 posted on
09/16/2002 9:32:20 AM PDT by
mombonn
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson