In the British Parliament there is a long-standing rule that one Honourable Member should never accuse another of being a liar (which has led to some interesting circumlocutions, most of which get slapped down by the Speaker).
Is there a similar rule in the American Congress? (I was just musing as to whether that’s where the rule in GD comes from).
One clown yelled that at President Obama during a State of the Union speech, I believe.
Perhaps not a formal “rule” but certainly a very poor action on the floor.
The Senate frowns on such things. I think they believe in congeniality or some such nonsense and calling someone a liar on the floor would raise some eyebrows, although in recent years they wouldn’t raise much.
Is my impression totally wrong that the style of debate in the U.S. Congress is actually rather civilized (not to use the expression: dull)?
Both the House and the Senate have slightly different rules regarding speech that insults another member, a state, or the other house of Congress. If someone is called out for breaking this rule, which seems to need to be done contemporaneously, the member making the offending statements basically is told by the presiding officer that his speech is over. Other sanctions could theoretically apply, but I can’t think of any examples at the moment.
It happened very recently. Ted Cruz called Majority Leader Mitch McConnell a liar on the floor.
The result?
Oooh. How severe.
I think that the British Parliament, while pretty dull most of the time, can get quite lively. After all, the space between the two sides is supposed to keep them more than two swords length apart.
Transgressors can be sent out like naughty schoolchildren by being “named” by the Speaker.
So I guess you would never hear in the House of Commons the famous words a German MP (who would later become Foreign Minister) directed towards the Speaker of the House:
“Mr. Speaker, with all due respect, you’re an asshole!”
That’s a wordy lawyery way of saying “don’t be a jerk”, innit ?
I think it’s just assumed.
Where, oh where, was Marley23 when they needed him?
I think this has a lot to do with it. Compared to British Parliamentary debates, American Congress is noticeably dull and formal. I remember occasionally watching C-SPAN back in the 80s. They had only ever showed congressmen making long speeches (often to an almost completely empty chamber*!) Then one day they showed the British version, and I remember thinking, “Ah, is this normal? Or is the UK on the brink of revolution?!” It was like nothing you ever see in American congressional debates, especially when the British Prime Minister is also right in there with them. It’s all very civil and respectful enough, but it’s loud and boisterous, with endless ‘Harrumphing’ in the background. As far as I know US Presidents never ‘debate’ congressmen in anyway like that. Not on the open floor at least!*
You can credit George Washington with that. He sat in on one session of the Senate (I’m not sure if it was the first, but one of the earliest) and realized what a total waste of time it was. He never went back. Today, presidents only go to Congress for the State of the Union Address or occasionally, a speech to a joint session. In the early days, they didn’t even give a SotUA. The Constitution doesn’t require it to be a speech, just a communication.
That’s an interesting anecdote, I’d love to see what he (tried to) say!
But that’s just part of what happens in Parliament. Most of what happens in the chamber is the same long, dull speeches that nobody is there to hear.
Indeed, and it’s really tiresome hearing people in the UK who like to lecture on the immaturity of UK MPs that they spend their time shouting and booing in the Commons, and trying to patiently explain to them that they’re extrapolating from 30 minutes on Wednesdays to the work of the entire week.
It’s interesting though as an aside that many UK people seem embarassed by that ‘yah-boo’ side of things, but nearly every non-UKer I encounter is extremely jealous of it! Grass is always greener, I suppose…
All politicians lie. So would not calling a politician a liar in Congress by extension be telling the truth ?
Aus parliments had a rule like that. The convention was broken by the left some time ago, but it’s still mostly observed, because it’s mostly such a destructive act that nobody benefits.
Anyway, Aus parliments have a table in the centre, seperating the left from the right. The table is wide enough so that you can’t injure someone on the other side if you poke across with a sword. And the chairs are all fixed to the ground. I think it’s based on an English model.
You understand the reasoning when you watch fights breaking out and chairs being thrown in other countries.
I think that illustrates the really distinctive difference between Parlimentary democracy and American democracy.
Another rule in the UK House of Commons is a blanket ban on applause. The SNP got told off by the Speaker before the summer for clapping whenever their Members spoke.
How can you tell when a politician is lying? His lips are moving.
In the US, you’ll note that a senators speech begins by addressing the speaker as “Mr President” (of the Senate). This convention was set up specifically to help avoid the kind of behavior seen in GB. Or so I read, possibly in “Founding Brothers”.