On Scheduling, Article 1 §4.2

On Wednesdays we study the Constitution. I struggled over what to write for today. Last week I studied Article 1 §4.1, dealing with the management of elections. This week should be Article 1 §4.2, but let’s face it. Nobody gives a shit. I don’t. This week the Second Amendment is the only Constitutional topic on anyone’s mind. I spent the whole morning figuring out what I wanted to say, but eventually realized that anything I write on that topic today will be a rant, and when I deal with that topic, I want it to be the best researched, most carefully formulated analysis of my life.

So I’m going to stick to the program after all and write about Article 1 §4.2, knowing that there will be a fresh atrocity to reference when I do get to the Second Amendment. For now, then, fuck your thoughts and prayers, on to the articles.

1 §4.2

The Congress shall assemble at least once in every Year, and such Meeting shall be on the first Monday in December, unless they shall by Law appoint a different Day.

It’s strange to imagine the possibility of Congress taking a year off, but I guess the pace of life really was different back then. The phrasing is also a little strange to me, because it sounds like they are only required to meet for one day. As often seems to be the case, these short little clauses that seem procedural can be very problematic, and sure enough, 1 §4.2 has been altered by an Amendment.

The second clause of the 20^th Amendment says:

The Congress shall assemble at least once in every year, and such meeting shall begin at noon on the 3d day of January, unless they shall by law appoint a different day.

Wow. Just in case you were inclined to think of the Constitution in stone-tablet terms, ruminate on that for a minute. A Constitutional Amendment to change the date on which Congress opens its session – even though the Constitution allows for a regular law to do so.

The Constitution is the framework for our democracy, and the reference point for questions of law. But we should never forget that it was written by men – wealthy white men – whose understanding of the world was, although quite sophisticated, still limited by their time and place. They sometimes changed their minds, and we are not only free to question their choices, but required as citizens to evaluate whether their decisions are appropriate for us today.

Founders’ Intent is a fascinating academic question, but founders can be wrong. A nation’s ability to survive and thrive depends on its ability to adapt to changing circumstances and learn from past mistakes. That’s true whether it’s failure to count all people as people, or starting a work session right before the holidays.