Pelosi Moves to Cancel Trump’s State of the Union Speech. Good Riddance.

[EasyAce]

The shutdown may force the government to cancel the State of the Union.
By Robby Soave
http://reason.com/blog/2019/01/16/state-of-the-union-trump-pelosi-cancel

On Wednesday, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D–Calif.)

asked President Trump to delay his State of the Union address due to security concerns stemming from the government shutdown. Alternatively, Trump could simply submit a written statement in lieu of an in-person speech, noted Pelosi.

If Trump opted for the latter, this would be by far the best thing to come out of the shutdown. The elaborate spectacle of the modern State of the Union speech—a yearly production—is wholly unnecessary. The country would be well rid of it . . .

. . . One hundred or so State of the Unions [after Woodow Wilson's first such speech], the executive branch is less constrained than ever before in U.S. history. Wilson's tradition is not the sole or the predominant cause, but it does contribute to a vision of the president as the central and most important figure in the government, rather than one office amidst three co-equal branches. As Steve Chapman wrote for Reason in 2015, "The State of the Union address has grown in step with presidential presumption. It's a conspicuous symptom of a dangerous malady: We expect too much of our presidents and limit them too little."

Trump has not yet responded to Pelosi's letter, and it's hard to imagine him passing on a chance to hoard the spotlight. But if the shutdown somehow ends up forcing the government to cancel the State of the Union, I say good riddance.

---------------------------
This may be the only idea from Nancy Pelousy with which I can agree! I've long argued that it was well past time for American presidents to revert to Jefferson's practise of just submitted the Constitutionally-required state of the union in writing and have done with it, and knock it the hell off with what has long amounted to the American edition of what Jefferson feared, a royal proclamation.---EA.

[goatprairie]

I'm near seventy years old. I have not one time ever listened to or watched a SOTU address.  Even for presidents I liked. Life is too short.

[skeeter]

Pelosi's reasons here are very specific - she's looking at the business end of a losing argument and its not in her interests to give Trump the floor.

Although I wouldn't disagree with doing away with SOU entirely you know the rats will never pass up the opportunity when they have the WH back.

[EasyAce]

Pelosi's reasons here are very specific - she's looking at the business end of a losing argument and its not in her interests to give Trump the floor.

Although I wouldn't disagree with doing away with SOU entirely you know the rats will never pass up the opportunity when they have the WH back.

@skeeter
I wonder if traction could be gained for a Constitutional amendment requiring nothing further of the state of the union than a written message to Congress. (I wonder if anyone in position to do so would have the cojones to do it. Let's face it: Damnocrats and Republicants alike love it when a president from their party deigns to grace Crapola Hill with his presence for a windbag speech.) Let a president---any president---rant his or her fool head off in a written State of the Union address. Then just send it to Congress, which should consider itself unobligated to do anything more than accept it. (The proposed amendment should include a line barring any senator or representative from reading the screed aloud on the floor, just in case.  )

[Free Vulcan]

Pelosi's reasons here are very specific - she's looking at the business end of a losing argument and its not in her interests to give Trump the floor.

Although I wouldn't disagree with doing away with SOU entirely you know the rats will never pass up the opportunity when they have the WH back.

Nailed it.