POL - Two sets of rules?

[MrBug708]

PELOSI LOWERS THE BOOM
Wed May 16 2007 14:43:59 ET

After losing a string of embarrassing votes on the House floor because of procedural maneuvering, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi has decided to change the current House Rules to completely shut down the floor to the minority.

The Democratic Leadership is threatening to change the current House Rules regarding the Republican right to the Motion to Recommit or the test of germaneness on the motion to recommit. This would be the first change to the germaneness rule since 1822.

In protest, the House Republicans are going to call procedural motions every half hour.

[Glengoyne]

Pelosi is the Delay of the left, well okay that is an exaggeration. As much as I don't like her, she has a long way to go before reaching Delay's level of belligerent partisanship.

This does make me curious as to what she failed to do that allowed her be out maneuvered, or if the Republicans are stepping outside the box by using old rules in new ways.

[Brillig]

Does Pelosi somehow think the Democrats will retain the majority in perpetuity?

This is taking short-sightedness to new heights.

[NoMyths]

"The Democratic Leadership is threatening to change the current House Rules regarding the Republican right to the Motion to Recommit or the test of germaneness on the motion to recommit. This would be the first change to the germaneness rule since 1822."

What does this actually mean, though? I've only seen this post and one on NRO about the issue, both of which places seem to be decrying the fall of the Union, and yet neither with specific details or explanations.

I might also point out that if the Congressional majority is losing votes because of "procedural maneuvering", the Democrats aren't really the ones who come off looking shady here.

[NoMyths]

dola...

Although I did just find this: http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/house-members-call-temporary-truce-on-procedural-battle-2007-05-16.html

House members call temporary truce on procedural battle
By Jackie Kucinich
May 17, 2007
Democrats will not change House rules governing the minority’s ability to use parliamentary procedure to alter bills, according to House Republicans who fought the effort.

House Republicans met with Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) yesterday afternoon, as they were successfully slowing House business by calling a series of procedural votes. They had threatened to keep on going until the Democratic leadership assured them that it would not change the rules governing the germaneness of an amendment to a bill.

Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) said he and Minority Whip Roy Blunt (R-Mo.) met with Hoyer, who assured them
that the Democrats will make no changes to the rules in the next two weeks, and would not do so without consulting the minority thereafter.

“They are not likely to go into that direction again,” Boehner said.

Rules Committee ranking member David Dreier (R-Calif.) called the prospect of the change “horrifying,” adding that it was one of the most important distinctions between the House and the Senate.

Republicans began their assault mid-afternoon after hearing that the Democratic leadership planned to change the germaneness rule, which would effectively limit the minority’s ability to challenge provisions in a bill on the floor.

According to the Republican Study Committee, the Democrats would have attached the rule to the budget resolution, which is expected to come to the floor today. If the rule had been changed, GOP members wishing to amend pay-as-you-go rules would have been limited in what type of offset they could introduce.

Just after 2 p.m., Blunt sent out an alert to members.

“Members are advised that the Democratic leadership is threatening to change the current House rules regarding the Republican right to offer the motion to recommit and/or the test of germaneness on the motion to recommit,” the message said.

But Hoyer disputed that claim. In a statement late yesterday, he said that “no rule change … has been formally proposed.” He charged that Republicans have exploited pay-go rules by offering motions to recommit on bills that do not have any relevance to the legislation itself.

A spokesman for Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) also criticized the GOP tactic, charging that “Republicans are abusing the rules of the House and finding any excuse to score political points and today is no exception.”

By press time, Republicans had called almost a dozen procedural votes.

A GOP leadership aide said if the rule was changed, Republicans were prepared to continue the procedural votes and begin to thwart progress on the committee level as well through parliamentary procedure.

Republicans have successfully passed 11 motions to recommit on the House floor, including one in March that caused Hoyer to threaten to change the rule.

On March 23, Republicans effectively postponed a vote on a bill that would give District of Columbia residents a voting member of the House by offering a motion to recommit that would have lifted gun restrictions in Washington.

The bill was quickly yanked from the floor until further announcements by Pelosi, leaving House Democratic leaders stunned.

Following the move, Hoyer hinted that the rules may have to change, causing a flurry of angry statements from Republican leaders.

“If the majority leader’s reported comments are accurate, House Democrats can expect a vigorous fight from House Republicans, and a lot of criticism from the American people,” Boehner said."

[Flasch186]

I remember the right doing the same thing when they were majority so its funny watching them squirm now in their short term amnesia.....

HOWEVER, just like I thought it was wrong for the Republicans to do that when they were majority, it is equally wrong of the Democrats. Perhaps I dont know everything that is going on up there but it is wrong to cry foul 2 years ago when they were the victims and then perpetrate bully behaviour when the majority.

[BishopMVP]

Republicans are abusing the rules of the House and finding any excuse to score political points and today is no exception.Pot, meet Kettle. Kettle, Pot.HOWEVER, just like I thought it was wrong for the Republicans to do that when they were majority, it is equally wrong of the Democrats. Perhaps I dont know everything that is going on up there but it is wrong to cry foul 2 years ago when they were the victims and then perpetrate bully behaviour when the majority.Meet the new Congress, same as the old Congress. Did anyone really expect the Democrats to be more ethical once in power, or the Republicans less obstructionist when out of power?

In other news, I think the approval ratings of Congress are around 27% now.

[Flasch186]

Pot, meet Kettle. Kettle, Pot.Meet the new Congress, same as the old Congress. Did anyone really expect the Democrats to be more ethical once in power, or the Republicans less obstructionist when out of power?

In other news, I think the approval ratings of Congress are around 27% now.

I hoped and like some of the bills that have been passed and their investigation of the hiding this administration, with the influence of Rove (yes I believe he is a bad bad person), has been doing....but that's for another thread.

[JPhillips]

So let me see if I get this right.

Republicans are using rules more aggressively to shut down legislation.

Democrats want to change the rules so Republicans can't shut down legislation.

Isn't this the same kind of power politics that happens every session?

[Passacaglia]

Yes. It's just that we're all on different sides now.

[CraigSca]

Hurray for politics!

[Warhammer]

You know what though. If they're too pre-occupied with this stuff, they can't screw around with any laws that affect us.

[flere-imsaho]

PELOSI LOWERS THE BOOM
Wed May 16 2007 14:43:59 ET

I'm going to have to ask what your source is here, because the link NoMyths posted puts this in a very different light.

You know what though. If they're too pre-occupied with this stuff, they can't screw around with any laws that affect us.

It's a sad day when this is our best case scenario, and it is certainly that.

[JPhillips]

Honestly this kind of stuff doesn't bother me. What really upsets me is the backpedaling on lobbying reform.

[panerd]

You know what though. If they're too pre-occupied with this stuff, they can't screw around with any laws that affect us.

Always felt that way. I hope in 2008 either a Democrat wins the white house and somehow the Republicans take back Congress or the Democrats keep control of Congress but lose the general election. Gridlock, the perfect government. I can't think of one thing (outside of national defense) that the government has done in my lifetime that was useful or couldn't have been done better through the private sector.

[flere-imsaho]

I can't think of one thing (outside of national defense) that the government has done in my lifetime that was useful or couldn't have been done better through the private sector.

The Intarweb? :p

[JPhillips]

I can't think of one thing (outside of national defense) that the government has done in my lifetime that was useful or couldn't have been done better through the private sector.

I don't know your age, but I can think of a lot of things in my 35 years that are useful and couldn't be done by the private sector.

[MrBug708]

I'm going to have to ask what your source is here, because the link NoMyths posted puts this in a very different light.



It's a sad day when this is our best case scenario, and it is certainly that.

http://lonestartimes.com/2007/05/16/pelosi-to-change-rules-in-place-since-1822/

[BYU 14]

This is taking short-sightedness to new heights.

The first thing she has in common with Bush.

[panerd]

I don't know your age, but I can think of a lot of things in my 35 years that are useful and couldn't be done by the private sector.

I am 33, must have been in the last 2-3 years. :)

[PilotMan]

Honestly this kind of stuff doesn't bother me. What really upsets me is the backpedaling on lobbying reform.

Holy Shit! JP and I agree on something for once. The level of distrust in Washington has gotten to the level where I am not sure how we can pick people who are not corrupt or won't end up being corrupt. I would like to say that a watchdog should be there to keep the focus on the people, but that doesn't guarentee anything either.

How can the govt regulate to population on everything from taxes to businesses to food, and drugs, and then be so lax about regulating themselves? I have come to the conclusion that no group should be allowed to set the terms of their compliance (ie. emissions as one example.)

[Richard Weed]

Absolute power corrupts absolutely.

[Buccaneer]

|
|
|
|
V

[MrBigglesworth]

http://lonestartimes.com/2007/05/16/pelosi-to-change-rules-in-place-since-1822/
The text isn't from there, it's from the impeccable Drudge Report.

After doing some research, this is standard GOP fare. They found a rule they could exploit, and are exploiting it. For example, in the debate over the extra congressman from DC, they added an amendment to repeal gun control laws in DC. Obviously, gun control laws have nothing to do with whether or not DC should get representation in the House. Hoyer and the Dems are talking about changing the Germaneness Rule, not the Motion to Recommit rule. From what I read, they are attempting to make sure that the amendments added with the Motions to Recommit are germane to the bill in question.

On the merits, I don't see how it is a good thing that popular legislation with a support of the majority of congressmen can be scuttled by splitting the majority party by adding an amendment that is unrelated to the original legislation. You can definitely make an argument that democracy is better served if that is not allowed to happen.

Let's look at what the House was like under Delay though:

- Shut down the House ethics committee
- Left votes open to bribe members into voting for it (Medicare the most notable)
- Abramoff
- Introduced bills and voted on them within minutes, without allowing members the ability to read the bill (PATRIOT Act, for one)
- Punished lobbyists for hiring Democrats
- Reduced workweek and increased trivial bills in order to decrease deliberations
- Etc.

With these things, you can't say that democracy is better served for it. That being said, the recent signs that the Dems are going back on their lobbying reform promises is a little alarming.

[Tigercat]

This isn't a result of power, its a result of power being obviously in the hand of too few. (One party or the other.)

Its hard for the parties to know how not to fight when American politics is built on only two parties, so that all our politicians know how to do is fight each other.

[Karlifornia]

God...what a headache. This has become too much for me to even care about anymore. Is that wrong, as a young American? What do I even have in common with these assholes? Fuck it...I'm moving to Fiji-where my vote actually counts!

[BishopMVP]

God...what a headache. This has become too much for me to even care about anymore. Is that wrong, as a young American? What do I even have in common with these assholes? Fuck it...I'm moving to Fiji-where my vote actually counts!FYI, Fiji has had 4 military coups in the last 20 years. Still, a great place to go.

[flere-imsaho]

Hoyer and the Dems are talking about changing the Germaneness Rule, not the Motion to Recommit rule. From what I read, they are attempting to make sure that the amendments added with the Motions to Recommit are germane to the bill in question.

Ironically, isn't this exactly what Bush complained about not long ago when he defended his use of signing statements? That bills had all sorts of unrelated crap in them? So here the House Republicans are opposing something that not only makes good common sense, but is indirectly supported by their President! LOL! :D