So, until the vote counts give us something to talk about, let's consider a bizarre political fight that has the potential to blow up after the election.
The new session of the Legislature begins in January, and before that, in December, lawmakers will meet "for organizational and orientation purposes" as prescribed by the state constitution. Part of the organization relates to lawmakers making new rules for how their session will be carried out.
It's typically pretty boring stuff and flies under the general public's radar, but the rules passed are serious business. Lawmakers have a dress code, for instance, that requires people on the floors of the chambers to be dressed up.
There aren't exceptions.
During the 2017 session, Gov. Doug Burgum was kicked off the state Senate floor for wearing jeans.
For the 2020 session, the rules-making process will be quite a bit more high-profile than usual because that process is where the Legislature's precautions for the COVID-19 pandemic will be put in place.
Things we will likely see is the availability of a system for remote participation so that not all lawmakers have to be in the chambers or committee rooms.
And, of course, there will also probably be a mask mandate, which just makes sense given how many elderly and at-risk individuals serve in the Legislature.
That debate could turn into a bit of a donnybrook.
Several North Dakota lawmakers, most of them in the orbit of state Rep. Rick Becker's Bastiat Caucus, have expressed no small amount of antipathy for mask mandates during the pandemic. In fact, when the question of a mandate came up at a recent meeting of the interim Legislative Procedure and Arrangements Committee, one of Becker's disciples, state Sen. Oley Larsen, R-Minot, dissented against not only a mask mandate but also screenings such as temperature checks at the capitol building.
Before that meeting, Larsen, who said he was running a fever at the time, said he bypassed the temperature-screening station.
Larsen's point of view is not shared by most lawmakers, or even a majority of Republican lawmakers, but he's not exactly alone either.
What will those people do if the rules for participating in the legislative session in-person require a mask?
Lawmakers I've spoken to about this say someone not following the House and Senate chambers' rules can be escorted out by the Sergeant-at-Arms (with an assist from law enforcement if need be).
Will we see that happen?
We can hope not, but plenty of people I've spoken to in political circles are worried about it.
There could also be litigation. Can a legislative body legally ban a member for not abiding by a dress code? Or, amid a public health emergency, refusing to wear a mask?
Again, all lawmakers will likely have an opportunity to do their work remotely, allowing the dissenters to participate without masking, but will they avail themselves of that opportunity or choose to right instead?
If the political atmosphere in this fraught moment tells us anything, they'll likely fight.
These proposed rules will have to be approved by the rules committees for the House and the Senate, and then voted on by the full chambers. Which means, I think, that each legislative chamber will have to meet, in full, at least once before any sort of social distancing can commence.
To comment on this article, visit www.sayanythingblog.com
Rob Port, founder of SayAnythingBlog.com, is a Forum Communications commentator. Reach him on Twitter at @robport or via email at rport@forumcomm.com.
"port" - Google News
November 04, 2020 at 04:00AM
https://ift.tt/2TSAW0q
Port: There is a brewing fight over masking at the next legislative session - The Dickinson Press
"port" - Google News
https://ift.tt/2VXul6u
https://ift.tt/2WmIhpL
No comments:
Post a Comment