Kansas lawmaker more inspired than ever to do away with lame duck

Rep. Lynn Jenkins (R-Kansas) is not at all impressed by talk of how much work Congress got done during the lame-duck session. In fact, she’d like to ban these after-election sessions altogether.

Jenkins introduced a bill last summer that would put an end to the lame-duck session except in the case of a national emergency when leaders would call members back to Washington to respond.

Calling Jan. 5 "a new day in the House," she predicted a "more thoughtful" environment to get her bill through this time.

“I am just concerned with the amount of activity that we see happening in these lame-duck sessions, when the folks [who were not reelected] are no longer accountable to the people that they represent,” she told Fox News on Thursday.

“Usually, when you get fired, you are escorted to the door," she said. "You’re not allowed to linger for months and wreak havoc with the nation, and which is precisely what I think the potential is.”

Critics of legislating during lame-duck sessions argue that lawmakers who are not re-elected don’t have the same accountability that members do during normal sessions, and could and often do vote against their constituents’ interests. In making their case, they cite the 20th amendment to the Constitution, which establishes the beginning and ending of the terms of elected federal offices and deals with scenarios in which there is no president-elect. It was ratified in 1933.

The amendment reduced the amount of time between Election Day and the beginning of newly elected Congress. Originally the terms of the president, the vice president and the incoming elected Congress began on March 4, four months after the elections were held. The lapse in time was a practical necessity back then before members and the administration relied on airplanes to travel to and from their districts, but in the modern era, it impeded the functioning of government.

Originally, under the Constitution, Congress was required to convene at least once each year in December, which created a mandatory lameduck session. But under the 20th amendment, the Congress could determine whether to convene or not.

Jenkins and other conservatives interpret the elimination of a mandatory lameduck as a backlash against the practice and not what the Constitution intended.

“[E]very Congress has 22 months before an election to do their job and to finish the work that is before them,” she said. “And my contention is, based on when you look back to the 20th Amendment … there has been a recent article quoting a law professor at the University of Notre Dame who is a scholar on the 20th Amendment. He claims that this last lame-duck session is exactly what the 20th Amendment was designed to stop.”

Under Jenkins’s bill, Congress would end after Election Day. Any outstanding appropriations bills would be handled through a continuing resolution that would punt action on the bill until the next Congress.

Although Democrats controlled the majority during the the most recent lame-duck session, Jenkins said she is not motivated by partisan politics.

“Like I said, I think mistakes have been made on both sides,” she aid. “But we should never, ever allow folks who are no longer accountable to wreak havoc with our country.”