A Quote by Evan Bayh

If you are the executive, you're probably going to have more of an impact than if you're one of a hundred members of the Senate, certainly one of 435 members of the House.
I support efforts to limit the terms of members of Congress, especially members of the House and members of the Senate.
If you're a first-responder in Missouri as part of a fire department, you're three times more likely to respond to a drug overdose than you are a fire. So it's a problem. I don't know exactly what the right number is, but certainly I think members of the Senate and House are rightly concerned about it.
I'm never running for office. I love being able to speak to members of Congress or members of the Senate and floating on either side, because it takes all of us. It's going to take both of them.
I think it's fair to say that there's a lot of conversations between House members and Senate members on a regular basis, and I think that's what our constituents would expect, is to have bicameral conversations throughout the process.
Moments ago, the U.S. Senate decided to do the unthinkable about gun violence - nothing at all. Over two years ago, when I was shot point-blank in the head, the U.S. Senate chose to do nothing. Four months ago, 20 first-graders lost their lives in a brutal attack on their school, and the U.S. Senate chose to do nothing. It's clear to me that if members of the U.S. Senate refuse to change the laws to reduce gun violence, then we need to change the members of the U.S. Senate.
We all know members of the House and Senate - especially the House - who are just crazy and say things that aren't true, Democrats and Republicans.
One out of four hundred and thirty-five members of the House is not going to transform the culture of the institution, but we've got to start somewhere.
I have saved $1,638,580 over my four years. That may not seem like a lot, faced with our deficit, but multiply it by 435 members of the House - and then the senators get three times as much - and you are adding up several millions in savings.
In the House, I was named one of the most bipartisan members of Congress, and that's a title I plan on continuing to hold in the Senate.
I will say, nothing in my time in the Senate has more surprised me than senators and House members want to weigh in on everything under the sun, but they do not want to weigh in on a clearly defined constitutional duty to declare war. It just stuns me.
It is preposterous that the current members of the United States Senate and all of their predecessors for more than 200 years haven't been able to read the Constitution and do what it says.
I'm more concerned about members of Congress being drug-free than I am about members of the Yankees or Giants.
I'm more concerned about members of Congress being drug-free than I am about members of the Yankees or Giants
The constitution has divided the powers of government into three branches, Legislative, Executive and Judiciary, lodging each with a distinct magistracy. The Legislative it has given completely to the Senate and House of Representatives. It has declared that the Executive powers shall be vested in the President, submitting special articles of it to a negative by the Senate, and it has vested the Judiciary power in the courts of justice, with certain exceptions also in favor of the Senate.
Belonging to the Gang of Eight carries massive responsibility in representing all 435 members of the legislature in very sensitive national security exercises.
The bill then says if the Senate does not act, then H.R. 1 (the House-passed bill that cuts $61 billion) will be the law of the land. In addition to that, it says that if all else fails, and the Senate brings about a shutdown, then members should not get their pay.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!