Commanding My Body

[Commander]

Originally Posted by HardCory

Good stuff I tried some strongman training the other night but stopped after my daughter smashed one of the stones over my head.

Oooo, ouch, good to know there are others doing my type of strongman training...my son sent a small atlas stone down my neck...that was cold!

------

In other news:

A picture's worth 1000 words....



Myths vs. Facts regarding Wisconsin

[Commander]

309 days to get bigger than Bob Brill

-----

Friday

DB CG Neutral Press
72, 74.5, 77, 79.5x5
82x5, 3 sets
67x8
69.5x8

Pulldown
100x15, 3 sets

superset with

Suspended Pushups
BWx12, 13, 13

Ab Wheel rollouts
BWx10, 3 sets

superset with

Crunches

Band Stiff Arm Pulldown, Rows and Flys

[superbilt]

I think people are addressing the wrong issues in Wisconsin. The people are protesting to keep their collective bargaining rights. Most people are willing to pay something for health care and pensions. We are facing a similar issue here in NJ because the politicians have been robbing the pension system for years. We pay 5.5% of our salary to our pensions and 1.5% of our salary for healthcare. The flaw in that is someone making $30k pays far less than the person who makes $80k for the same health coverage. The rich are trying to turn this into class warfare and a private vs. public battle. Instead of people unifying to fight for their rights they are being divided. United we stand but divided we destroy ourselves and the middle class.

[Commander]

Originally Posted by superbilt

I think people are addressing the wrong issues in Wisconsin. The people are protesting to keep their collective bargaining rights. Most people are willing to pay something for health care and pensions.

I agree that they are protesting for collective bargaining rights, I addressed that here:

http://www.abcbodybuilding.com/forum...postcount=1387

The big issue in Wisconsin today is whether or not public sector workers should have collective bargaining rights. In an Aug. 16, 1937 letter to Luther Steward, the president of the National Federation of Public Employees, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt had something to say about that:

Meticulous attention should be paid to the special relationships and obligations of public servants to the public itself and to the Government.

All Government employees should realize that the process of collective bargaining, as usually understood, cannot be transplanted into the public service. It has its distinct and insurmountable limitations when applied to public personnel management. The very nature and purposes of Government make it impossible for administrative officials to represent fully or to bind the employer in mutual discussions with Government employee organizations.

----

And from Heritage:

The founders of the labor movement viewed unions as a vehicle to get workers more of the profits they help create. Government workers, however, don’t generate profits. They merely negotiate for more tax money. When government unions strike, they strike against taxpayers. FDR considered this “unthinkable and intolerable.”

Further, Governor Scott Walker is not attempting to take away the right to collectively bargain on wages, just on pensions and benefits.

Originally Posted by superbilt

We are facing a similar issue here in NJ because the politicians have been robbing the pension system for years. We pay 5.5% of our salary to our pensions and 1.5% of our salary for healthcare. The flaw in that is someone making $30k pays far less than the person who makes $80k for the same health coverage. The rich are trying to turn this into class warfare and a private vs. public battle. Instead of people unifying to fight for their rights they are being divided. United we stand but divided we destroy ourselves and the middle class.

Well, if you look at the numbers above in the chart (post 1391), there definitely is a private vs. public issue. Even if the union members are willing to pay more for insurance and towards their pension, they are still far below what private citizens are paying.

What do you mean by the "rich" are trying to turn this into class warfare?

1) The median income of the average taxpayer in Wisconsin is less than the majority of the union teachers who are out there protesting.

Wisconsin teachers are paid an average salary of $51,000. Annualized to account for their 180-day work year, that’s $68,000, and that is in addition to their very fine benefits, pensions, and job security. The median household income — that is, total household income, including households with two or more earners — was $49,993 in 2009 in Wisconsin.

2) Obama has sided with the unions in this, he's not exactly poor nor does he represent the poor.

3) Gov. Walker openly campaigned on this and was elected by 52% of the population of Wisconsin.

4) I am personally not rich

And here is what I think people are not addressing or acknowledging:

The people of Wisconsin spoke in November 2010 and voted in people who represent their values, if that means Governor Walker gets his legislation through, so be it, if he doesn't, so be it. But you have to do your job, not live in a motel across state lines.

Regardless of what anyone's stance on this issue is, I hope we can agree that it is cowardly for Democrats to run across state lines so they don't have to participate in the legislative process.

Sorry, that is not how the democratic process works. If you don't have enough votes to stop Governor Walker....guess what, then you don't stop him. Running away is not the solution, debate the legislation, offer alternatives, but get back to work.

[superbilt]

Teachers also have to deal with people's children and should be paid well enough to support their families. If people want their kids to grow up idiots then hire unqualified teachers who do not have degrees or experience. I don't know what the cost of living is in Wisconsin but here in NJ $51,000 will not get you much.

The problem is the government (politicians) do not live up to the contracts that were negotiated with the workers. What the Governor is doing is basically saying I don't care about you, your family, and the services you provide. Do what I say because I am the governor. Do I think the workers should pay into their pensions and health care? Absolutely, it is only fair.

People in the public sector make on average 15% less salary then a person with the same job in the private sector.

I am in no way pro-union. I have to be part of a union because it is mandatory. I would much rather take that money and invest it into something better. That is the states fault for making my position and many like it a union-required position.

The public workers pay taxes like everyone else. They are partially paying their own salaries.

Public workers do generate revenue. If people have such a problem with public workers they can privatize everything and see how that disaster pans out. I.E. the DMV in NJ was privatized and now many have closed down and their services have been slashed. Privatize police and everytime you need them then you have to pay for them to come help you.

The fact is when everything was good nobody was complaining right. Then Wall Street and the Mortgage industry got greedy and messed up the whole economy. People quickly forget that and want to blame public employees for everything.

[Commander]

Originally Posted by superbilt

Teachers also have to deal with people's children and should be paid well enough to support their families. If people want their kids to grow up idiots then hire unqualified teachers who do not have degrees or experience. I don't know what the cost of living is in Wisconsin but here in NJ $51,000 will not get you much.

Regardless what you think of 51K, it is MORE than the median income of other Wisconsin households. So, I think we are paying them enough to support their families.

The problem is the government (politicians) do not live up to the contracts that were negotiated with the workers. What the Governor is doing is basically saying I don't care about you, your family, and the services you provide. Do what I say because I am the governor. Do I think the workers should pay into their pensions and health care? Absolutely, it is only fair.

Who didn't live up to the contracts?

Obviously it is not fun to have your contract renegotiated, but even the previous Democrat Governor found himself in the positition of having to take drastic measures, i.e. layoffs and days without pay.

Is what the current Governor saying that he doesn't care? If he is, then the previous Governor is in the same boat. Or is he saying that he sees a budget deficit and public unions with too much collective bargaining rights and he wants to make his state fiscally solvent?

Remember, Governor Walker was just elected in November and took office on January 3, 2011. He did not create these problems, rather, he campaigned openly to find solutions for these problems. And he was crystal clear about his intentions:

http://dailyreporter.com/blog/2009/1...-and-benefits/

From November 13, 2009

People in the public sector make on average 15% less salary then a person with the same job in the private sector.

The facts state differently:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/...eral-pay_N.htm
http://reason.com/blog/2010/01/05/pu...-private-secto
http://innovationandgrowth.wordpress...s-private-pay/
http://reason.org/news/show/public-s...-sector-salary

This is from the first link, USA today:

I am in no way pro-union. I have to be part of a union because it is mandatory. I would much rather take that money and invest it into something better. That is the states fault for making my position and many like it a union-required position.

The public workers pay taxes like everyone else. They are partially paying their own salaries.

Public workers do generate revenue.

Please, I enjoy discussing this with you, but please include some type of back up for that statements. How do public workers generate revenue?

Their income is paid by tax dollars. There are some valuable services done by public workers, but they are not revenue producing. Schools, police and public works departs have to use money to function, they are not in the business of taking in revenue.

Looking at the federal level, the House of Representatives has the power to initiate revenue bills

Article 1, Section 8 explains how the collect revenue:

Clause 1: The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

Clause 2: To borrow Money on the credit of the United States

The collect revenue by taking and borrowing.

If people have such a problem with public workers they can privatize everything and see how that disaster pans out. I.E. the DMV in NJ was privatized and now many have closed down and their services have been slashed. Privatize police and everytime you need them then you have to pay for them to come help you.

There is a time and place for everything. Mail is being privatized and most people would probably agree that UPS and FedEx are good options.

The fact is when everything was good nobody was complaining right. Then Wall Street and the Mortgage industry got greedy and messed up the whole economy. People quickly forget that and want to blame public employees for everything.

That is not true, there were people with principles, Ron Paul (obviously this example doesn't apply to Wisconsin), who consistently have talked about the direction this government/country/etc is heading even when things were OK.

[WorkoutMchne]

Commander is completely correct on every account.

Everybody is missing the bigger picture though. In 5-10 (if not sooner) we are going to have a serious debate in this country on what the size and role of the federal government should be. Should it be large, intrusive, and unsustainable? Or should it be small with sound money like our founding fathers intended? Of course it should be the latter. All of our problems, and I mean every single one, comes from two things: 1. Too much government/federal reserve, and 2. Not following the constitution. Case in point: Article I, Section 8: (Powers of Congress) To coin money, and regulate the value therof. Article I, Section 10: No state shall make...any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payments of debts. ***Okay so right away we see that the Fed is unconstitutional as only the government has the authority to coin money and only gold and silver should be legal tender, yet we have the federal reserve who prints money and our money is not backed by gold.

The bigger issue about teachers is the unconstitutional department of education. Anytime government gets involved in something costs go up and the quality goes down.

To Commander's point, Ron Paul (my hero), has been talking about this for years along with other Austrian Economists like Peter Schiff. And we need to stop saying this like "The Wall Street and Mortgage Industry got greedy" They did to an extent, but it was all a result of too much government intervention and the unconstitutional federal reserve. The FED prints money, and printing money alone is the definition of inflation. By simply increasing the money supply what we have is now worth less, then rising prices will follow in the future. But, because the FED printed money for lenders, Fannie and Freddie were able to have cheap money and keep lending it to people that they know could not pay it back...And of course they didn't care if people could pay it back because 1. The loans are government backed, and 2. They would just flip the property to someone else and the money from them. They don't care where the money comes from.

Peter Schiff wrote a book called Crash Proof which was released in 2006/2007. Here is a video of Schiff with a compilation of his television appearances from around 2005-2007 explaining everything that is going to happen. Now at this time things are booming, but he knows that it is artificial and he lays out the coming crisis, but everyone laughs at him. Peter Schiff was exactly right (hence the name of the video). His book also lays it out. Other light reading should include Ron Paul's "End The Fed" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2I0QN-FYkpw

Bush/Greenspan = Obama/Bernanke...They are the same. Both of these President's and Fed chairs base their thoughts on the destructive Kenyesian economics. As Commander points out the government gets money in two ways: 1. Borrowing, 2. Taxation...but there is a 3rd way and that is simply by Ben Bernanke using his printing press or adding zeroes into the computer to increase the money supply. So, all the growth from 2002-2008 was not real wealth or GDP growth it simply came from counterfit money printed by Ben Bernanke.

Paper money is completely meaningless and will always fail. Money needs to be backed by something with intrinsic value...like gold. If money can be printed anytime then it doesn't mean anything.

And the gap between the wealthy and the poor is increasing. Why? The fed and the government. Liberals want to give the poor and middle class money, but instead of helping them it just wipes them out because they spend the money, and the economy is not driven by spending...it's driven by savings, production, and investment. Getting into a recession comes from over-spending. So, by lower income individuals spending now they are wiping themselves out. When a wealthy individual puts money in the bank that bank can then lend the money to create businesses...which are not related to government.

Now, we also spend 2 billion dollars a week on unconstitutional wars in which need to end immediately, and of course we fund those through the FED spending money. California just had to spend 10 million dollars to fire 5 teachers. If a teacher is horrible they can still keep their job, get steady raises, and retire at 55 with full benefits. This is an absolute joke...I'm sure a salesman would like to know that if his sales declined he could still get this. The reason for this is because of government being involved in education...it's beyond ridiculous.

Other departments to abolish: The department of homeland security, health and human services, Energy, and Agriculture...to name a few.

We can't sustain these things. The government needs to cut all this spending. Because if they raise taxes they have to then print the difference in paper dollars owed through the federal reserve. Not too mention this will effect interest rates.

When we decide to get the government involved in one thing, then it's impossible to get them out and government slowly but surely gets involved in everything else, which eventually ends up being unsustainable and with the dollar failing.

People say, "What you don't like education, you don't like health care, so you don't want the government to help to make it better?" ACTUALLY, I love these things and I do want them better, which is exactly why I want the government out...they can't do it, and it gets worse and more expensive with their involvement.

We can't take care of people cradle to grave with this welfare state.

We have to protect liberty. Liberals want people to have liberty on social issues...fine, but why don't they want them to have economic liberty? Why not have liberty with your own money? They want to take care of people and make people more dependent on the government.

And I would like to apologize to all the other countries of the world because our dollar is the reserve currency for the entire world. Essentially, they backed their money with our money...not good. So, hyperinflation is coming due to the destruction of our dollar. 4 or $5 dollars for a gallon of gas...try 100 or 200. Or maybe $50 dollars for a cup of coffee. Get ready.

But if we embraced a recession in 2002 instead of passing stimulus or in 2008 then we would have been forced to save and get through it, but each time we use a stimulus it just delays a recession and makes it worse. This happens because no administration wants this on their watch because they wouldn't get re-elected, but we need to embrace what will come so we can move out of it more quickly. The teachers in Wisconsin are just one small part of the awfulness that is government involvement in our lives.

Whoever is reading, watch the Peter Schiff video above...please. We haven't had capitalism in many many years in this coutnry, and he will explain how the government has ruined it over the past half century, and capitalism and capitalism alone will avoid these problems. We have completely distorted the free market. We need to roll back government, repeal regulation, and restore capitalism. And of course we need to change our foreign policy to being non-interventionist.

Sadly, there's only one man in congress who understands all of this:
"The purpose of any political activity, from my view point, is to promote liberty." --Ron Paul

[Commander]

Originally Posted by WorkoutMchne

Commander is completely correct on every account.

Everybody is missing the bigger picture though. In 5-10 (if not sooner) we are going to have a serious debate in this country on what the size and role of the federal government should be. Should it be large, intrusive, and unsustainable? Or should it be small with sound money like our founding fathers intended? Of course it should be the latter. All of our problems, and I mean every single one, comes from two things: 1. Too much government/federal reserve, and 2. Not following the constitution. Case in point: Article I, Section 8: (Powers of Congress) To coin money, and regulate the value therof. Article I, Section 10: No state shall make...any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payments of debts. ***Okay so right away we see that the Fed is unconstitutional as only the government has the authority to coin money and only gold and silver should be legal tender, yet we have the federal reserve who prints money and our money is not backed by gold.

The bigger issue about teachers is the unconstitutional department of education. Anytime government gets involved in something costs go up and the quality goes down.

To Commander's point, Ron Paul (my hero), has been talking about this for years along with other Austrian Economists like Peter Schiff. And we need to stop saying this like "The Wall Street and Mortgage Industry got greedy" They did to an extent, but it was all a result of too much government intervention and the unconstitutional federal reserve. The FED prints money, and printing money alone is the definition of inflation. By simply increasing the money supply what we have is now worth less, then rising prices will follow in the future. But, because the FED printed money for lenders, Fannie and Freddie were able to have cheap money and keep lending it to people that they know could not pay it back...And of course they didn't care if people could pay it back because 1. The loans are government backed, and 2. They would just flip the property to someone else and the money from them. They don't care where the money comes from.

Peter Schiff wrote a book called Crash Proof which was released in 2006/2007. Here is a video of Schiff with a compilation of his television appearances from around 2005-2007 explaining everything that is going to happen. Now at this time things are booming, but he knows that it is artificial and he lays out the coming crisis, but everyone laughs at him. Peter Schiff was exactly right (hence the name of the video). His book also lays it out. Other light reading should include Ron Paul's "End The Fed" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2I0QN-FYkpw

Bush/Greenspan = Obama/Bernanke...They are the same. Both of these President's and Fed chairs base their thoughts on the destructive Kenyesian economics. As Commander points out the government gets money in two ways: 1. Borrowing, 2. Taxation...but there is a 3rd way and that is simply by Ben Bernanke using his printing press or adding zeroes into the computer to increase the money supply. So, all the growth from 2002-2008 was not real wealth or GDP growth it simply came from counterfit money printed by Ben Bernanke.

Paper money is completely meaningless and will always fail. Money needs to be backed by something with intrinsic value...like gold. If money can be printed anytime then it doesn't mean anything.

And the gap between the wealthy and the poor is increasing. Why? The fed and the government. Liberals want to give the poor and middle class money, but instead of helping them it just wipes them out because they spend the money, and the economy is not driven by spending...it's driven by savings, production, and investment. Getting into a recession comes from over-spending. So, by lower income individuals spending now they are wiping themselves out. When a wealthy individual puts money in the bank that bank can then lend the money to create businesses...which are not related to government.

Now, we also spend 2 billion dollars a week on unconstitutional wars in which need to end immediately, and of course we fund those through the FED spending money. California just had to spend 10 million dollars to fire 5 teachers. If a teacher is horrible they can still keep their job, get steady raises, and retire at 55 with full benefits. This is an absolute joke...I'm sure a salesman would like to know that if his sales declined he could still get this. The reason for this is because of government being involved in education...it's beyond ridiculous.

Other departments to abolish: The department of homeland security, health and human services, Energy, and Agriculture...to name a few.

We can't sustain these things. The government needs to cut all this spending. Because if they raise taxes they have to then print the difference in paper dollars owed through the federal reserve. Not too mention this will effect interest rates.

When we decide to get the government involved in one thing, then it's impossible to get them out and government slowly but surely gets involved in everything else, which eventually ends up being unsustainable and with the dollar failing.

People say, "What you don't like education, you don't like health care, so you don't want the government to help to make it better?" ACTUALLY, I love these things and I do want them better, which is exactly why I want the government out...they can't do it, and it gets worse and more expensive with their involvement.

We can't take care of people cradle to grave with this welfare state.

We have to protect liberty. Liberals want people to have liberty on social issues...fine, but why don't they want them to have economic liberty? Why not have liberty with your own money? They want to take care of people and make people more dependent on the government.

And I would like to apologize to all the other countries of the world because our dollar is the reserve currency for the entire world. Essentially, they backed their money with our money...not good. So, hyperinflation is coming due to the destruction of our dollar. 4 or $5 dollars for a gallon of gas...try 100 or 200. Or maybe $50 dollars for a cup of coffee. Get ready.

But if we embraced a recession in 2002 instead of passing stimulus or in 2008 then we would have been forced to save and get through it, but each time we use a stimulus it just delays a recession and makes it worse. This happens because no administration wants this on their watch because they wouldn't get re-elected, but we need to embrace what will come so we can move out of it more quickly. The teachers in Wisconsin are just one small part of the awfulness that is government involvement in our lives.

Whoever is reading, watch the Peter Schiff video above...please. We haven't had capitalism in many many years in this coutnry, and he will explain how the government has ruined it over the past half century, and capitalism and capitalism alone will avoid these problems. We have completely distorted the free market. We need to roll back government, repeal regulation, and restore capitalism. And of course we need to change our foreign policy to being non-interventionist.

Sadly, there's only one man in congress who understands all of this:
"The purpose of any political activity, from my view point, is to promote liberty." --Ron Paul

Amen Brother!

Although, I would like to think that some of the House Freshman get it.

----

308 days to get big

Saturday

Arm Hypertrophy -4x - 30 seconds rest

Barbell Curl
65x10, 4 sets, increase weight

Inc DB Curl
17x10, 4 sets, increase weight

DB Hammer Curl
17x10, 4 sets, increase weight

CG DB Neutral Press
64.5x10, 10, 10, 10 - increase weight

Suspended OH Extension
BWx10, 4 sets

Tricep Pushdown
45x10, 4 sets, increase weight

Occlusion:

Occluded Leg Extension
60x30, 15, 15, 13

Occluded Suspended Bridge Leg Curl
BWx30, 15, 15

Occluded Calve Raise
BWx30, 15, 15, 15

[superbilt]

Fedex and UPS have far more generous pensions than most public workers have in fact my future uncle-in-law retired form UPS with 80% of his top salary and now works for Fedex. Most public workers retire with 25%-50% of their top salary with the exception of police and firefighters. Don't you think those high pensions from UPS and Fedex have something to do with costs? Not to mention Drivers get paid quite well.

Public workers generate revenue varying on the department. Police give tickets and fines it generate revenue for the town/county/state. Courts charge people to file motions. Garbage charges for special pickup. You get my point. Obviously, taxes led to the majority of salaries and benefits. There is no debate there.

The fact is not everything government does is great, but everything can not be privatized either. There are private schools for those that don't want their children in public school, but not everyone can afford that. You need police/fire/schools/courts/garbage/etc and they most be funded by the people.

Workout Machine- Ron Paul is a smart man too bad the Republican party is more interested in Sarah Palin and Chris Christie.

[Commander]

Originally Posted by superbilt

Fedex and UPS have far more generous pensions than most public workers have in fact my future uncle-in-law retired form UPS with 80% of his top salary and now works for Fedex. Most public workers retire with 25%-50% of their top salary with the exception of police and firefighters. Don't you think those high pensions from UPS and Fedex have something to do with costs? Not to mention Drivers get paid quite well.

There is a huge difference, Fedex and UPS are choosing to give pensions out of their profits and yes, that may mean that they have to raise certain prices. BUT, you are not forced to use FedEx or UPS, you have a choice of whether you contribute to their pensions or not. The people of Wisconsin MUST pay their taxes. They don't have a choice to contribute to the pensions of the teachers. When choice is removed from the equation, we must be very careful, that is why FDR didn't even believe in public sector unions.

Public workers generate revenue varying on the department. Police give tickets and fines it generate revenue for the town/county/state. Courts charge people to file motions. Garbage charges for special pickup. You get my point. Obviously, taxes led to the majority of salaries and benefits. There is no debate there.

OK, I get your point. Hopefully you get mine as well, that in the private sector, revenue is typically generated in a much healthier way. I.E. a voluntary exchange of goods and services. As people vote with the dollars, it tells business where to reinvest their revenue and then you get better goods and services. Unfortunately, in the public sector, you don't get to vote with your dollars, you HAVE to pay taxes, therefore, there isn't the same pressure/competitiveness that tends to drive innovation and improvement.

The fact is not everything government does is great, but everything can not be privatized either.

Agreed, the government has certain functions as outlined in the Constitution. As outlined in Article I, Section 8, the government has a responsibility to:

To establish Post Offices and Post Roads

To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;

To provide and maintain a Navy

...amongst a few other things, but not many.

There are private schools for those that don't want their children in public school, but not everyone can afford that. You need police/fire/schools/courts/garbage/etc and they most be funded by the people.

Well, those issues are best left resolved to the states.

Amendment 10 of the Constitution

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people

The US Consitution says NOTHING about education, which means they have no authority to get involved in it. Unfortunately, since the 1960's, the Federal Government became more involved in education and I think it is clear that our education system has not improved since then. Graduation rates are down, SAT scores are down, our performance as compared to other nations is down, violence is up.

Just one example:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/educati...mparison_x.htm

Workout Machine- Ron Paul is a smart man too bad the Republican party is more interested in Sarah Palin and Chris Christie.

I voted for Ron Paul in the primary. We'll see what happens in 2012.

------

There a couple points of mine that you ignored which I would like to know how you feel about:

1: FDR being against public sector unions and his very articulate reasoning for his views.

2: Governor Scott being elected to handle this mess as he openly campaigned on these isues directly (he didn't surprise anyone with this)

3: The Democratic legislators who are abandoning the democratic process (it seems ironic that they gave Republicans a hard time for being the party of "no", at least you have to show up and vote to be the party of "no")

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/...71Q2RR20110227

Wisconsin's Constitution says absent members can be compelled to appear. So the legislators are intentionally leaving the state so they are not in the juridisction of the Wisconsin Constitution. If anyone else fled a state so as not to be in a jurisdiction, we usually call that a crime, and the person, a criminal.

Article IV, Section 7 of Wisconsin Constitution:

Organization of Legislature; Quorum; Compulsory Attendance

Each house shall be the judge of the elections, returns and qualifications of its own members; and a majority of each shall constitute a quorum to do business, but a smaller number may adjourn from day to day, and may compel the attendance of absent members in such manner and under such penalties as each house may provide.