Congress passes `doomsday' plan
"I think (the new rule) is terrible in a whole host of ways - first, I think it's unconstitutional," said Norm Ornstein, a counselor to the independent Continuity of Government Commission, a bipartisan panel created to study the issue. "It's a very foolish thing to do, I believe, and the way in which it was done was more foolish."
But supporters say the rule provides a stopgap measure to allow the government to continue functioning at a time of national crisis.
GOP House leaders pushed the provision as part of a larger rules package that drew attention instead for its proposed ethics changes, most of which were dropped.
...
Rep. Brian Baird (D-Wash.), one of few lawmakers active on the issue, argued the rule change contradicts the U.S. Constitution, which states that "a majority of each (House) shall constitute a quorum to do business.
"Changing what constitutes a quorum in this way would allow less than a dozen lawmakers to declare war on another nation," Baird said.
So when people were squaking about the "ethics changes" legislation, WHY wasn't this brought up? And who do you think will be the last 12 standing? Hmmmmmm?
