Question my wife brought up about the patriot act...

[redirish28]

During one the revisions of the Patriot act. My wife thought she remember reading that part of the act allowed Bush to dissolve congress.


Is my wife confused with something else or does Bush have the ability and will he used it and IS that what he was basically threatening last night?

[nebenaube]

1. sounds like a "game on" moment.... n/t

[Benhurst]

2. I don't know; but I'm recommending this in hopes it will stay up

long enough for someone to post a definitive answer.

:hi:

[AndyA]

3. Do you mean "dissolve" Congress - as in do away with it?

I would think it would take more than a stipulation in the Patriot Act to do such a thing. The Constitution would have to be amended, it would seem. And that is a completely separate process.

Especially in a time of war, Congress plays an important role in government. I don't think there's any way the Patriot Act could do such a thing, but I wouldn't put it past * to try.

[redirish28]

4. Dissolve right. Sorry trying to type as wife was talking. Not a good combo.

[AndyA]

5. I'm not an expert, so I do hope someone who is sees your question.

It's a good one, and it does seem a lot of crap was slipped into the Patriot Act that shouldn't be there. The Senate took care of one of them yesterday, which prevents * from appointing interim United States Attorneys without first going to Congress.

One down, many more to go...

[Norquist Nemesis]

6. IIRC, there was something about appointing members of Congress if

there was a terrorist attack and something like 100 need to be replaced (all off the top of my head and probably has innaccuracies)...I'll see what I can find

[Norquist Nemesis]

7. Here's a little bit about the "Continuity of Congress"

http://www.antiwar.com/paul/?articleid=2742 (it's authored by Ron Paul, but still)
...
There are those who say that the power of appointment is necessary in order to preserve checks and balances and thus prevent an abuse of executive power. Of course, I agree that it is very important to carefully guard our constitutional liberties in times of crisis, and that an over-centralization of power in the executive branch is one of the most serious dangers to that liberty. However, during a time of crisis it is all the more important to have representatives accountable to the people making the laws. Otherwise, the citizenry has no check on the inevitable tendency of government to infringe on the people’s liberties at such a time. I would remind my colleagues that the only reason we are reexamining provisions of the PATRIOT Act is because of public concerns that this Act gives up too much liberty for a phantom security. Appointed officials would not be as responsive to public concerns.

Supporters of this plan claim that the appointment power will be necessary in the event of an emergency, and that the appointed representatives will only serve for a limited time. However, the laws passed by these "temporary" representatives will be permanent.
...
Last month, this body fulfilled its constitutional duty by passing HR 2844, the Continuity of Representation Act. HR 2844 exercises Congress’s power to regulate the time, place, and manner of elections by requiring the holding of special elections within 45 days after the Speaker or acting Speaker declares 100 or more members of the House have been killed. This proposal protects the people's right to choose their representatives at the time when such a right may be most important, while ensuring continuity of the legislative branch.