The president will provide his state of the union Tuesday, so why won't we call it that?

I'm Jenna, and this is Smarter News.

So while we may hear about President Trump's opinion on the state of the union, we will not call

the president's speech Tuesday a state of the union, we will not call the president's speech Tuesday a state of the union.

And I'll explain why in just a moment.

We borrow the term state of the union from the U.S. Constitution.

And I'm going to read from it here.

He, the president, shall from time to time give to the Congress information of the state of the Union and recommend to their consideration

such measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient. So translation, the president from time to time

will share with Congress his reflections and priorities. Note, it did not say in person. It did not

say in a speech. In fact, it was quite vague.

This touch base has taken a few different forms, in fact. President George Washington provided an

update in person. President John Adams did the same, but then President Thomas Jefferson

decided to do something different. He gave his updates in writing. And that tradition continued

for about 100 years until President Woodrow Wilson gave his state in writing. And that tradition continued for about 100 years until President

Woodrow Wilson gave his state of the union in person and got us back on track in that. And then we got

technology involved. Radio in 1923, President Truman on television in 1947, and President

Johnson on television in 1965 in prime time. And now that's the tradition we follow today. Why are we not

referring to this speech as the State of the Union? Well, we don't use this term in the press,

and most presidents don't as well, during their first year because they've been president

for such a short period of time. Next year, we will call this the president's state of the union, but right now

it's an address to a joint session of Congress, meaning that both chambers, the House and the

...