Yesterday's heated debate on how to proceed with government reform, whether to start with the discussion of 'Cardinal Laws' or local congresses, continues to divide the House of Representatives. Speaker of the House, Mr. Stanisław Małachowski, initiated the session, emphasizing the nation's critical moment for forming a government framework foundational to its prosperity and stability.

In the midst of trying to resolve these disputes, Nobleman Józef Komorowski from Chełm praised divine guidance in advancing national happiness, rooted not in conquests or oppression, but through diligent efforts in saving the homeland—suggesting the 'Regulation of Order' had been completed.

The Latvian representative, Mr. Antoni Gliszczyński, voiced concerns that the laws punishing treason were more intimidating to the accuser than the accused and suggested local funds should be considered for compensation, emphasizing their effectiveness similar to foreign subsidies.

Despite multiple attempts to find common ground, the House remains entangled in arguments over procedure specifics and how to best approach government form and function. Notably, a proposal by Mr. Albin Skórkowski suggests addressing defense and treasury matters ahead of local governance issues, pointing to the time-sensitive need for a strong military and financial system in the face of foreign pressure.

MR. PRESIDENT observed this division, reminding everyone of the Constitutional order of proposing legislation, and called for unity and prompt decision-making. Sadly, the session ended without consensus, adjourning to Friday morning. The Speaker asked members to consider well and convene with readiness to align on the direction for the Union's government formation.

To those following these developments, this may seem a typical legislative gridlock. However, considering the urgency with which the Commonwealth needs to strengthen its governmental structure, such debates are a test of the Union's democratic resolve. Even the President's call for decisive action appears to sway few, as factional interests and adherence to procedure continue to hamper progress.

Students, it's like watching a heated college debate where everyone agrees something has to change but can't decide where to start. Imagine having to write a group paper but your team can't even agree on the outline. It's frustrating and eats up time when the clock's ticking. Left unsaid is that while delegations argue, intense external pressures linger, highlighting daily the consequences of a weakened state apparatus.

Topics: Decision on what to start with the Sejm's activities - Sejmiks or Cardinal Laws; Project related to the organization of dicasteries (magistracies, treasury commissions); Economic affairs - setting sessions for their consideration; Proposals and voting on the organization of the Sejm's work; Opposition and its right to halt parliamentary procedures; Oaths of deputies for the examination of constitutional issues; Division of time for Sejm Sessions and their intended purpose; Upholding established decisions and amending Sejm decisions; Prepared speeches from individual deputies and senators regarding parliamentary procedures.;