Swearing in? Or cursing out?
Posted: Tuesday, January 06, 2009 7:12 PM by Carrie Dann
Filed Under:
Congress
From NBC's Carrie Dann and Mike Viqueira
For the first hour of the 111th Congress, the nation’s lawmakers were all smiles on the House floor. Freshmen thrust their hands across the aisle -- literally -- as they introduced themselves to their new colleagues. Representatives of both parties grinned together as they watched their children, who were invited to romp on the floor for the occasion.
But by the time the clock struck three times, things were back to normal.
"Shame on you!" Rep. James Sensenbrenner (R-WI) exclaimed. "Because you're shutting down the process and [it's] going to result in more partisanship, not less."
"They chose talking points over accomplishments," countered James McGovern (D-MA) about his Republican colleagues. "They chose to be the party of obstructionism."
The debate at issue between the two parties was a complicated procedural measure that House Republicans, largely emasculated by their minority status, have effectively used to stymie their opponents over the past two years. By passing a new package of House rules by a 242-181 vote today, Democrats eliminated in some cases the minority party's ability to file a so-called "motion to recommit." In the past, such motions served as one of the only opportunities the minority party had to influence the substance of any tax-related legislation.
Since losing the majority in 2006, Republicans employed the tactic 50 times, usually to raise objections about tax increases included in bills. But in some cases, perhaps most memorably during a debate over DC voting rights in 2007, Republicans have used a motion to recommit to tack a popular amendment to a bill, rendering it political poison for many Democrats to vote against the measure. The new rules strip the minority party of its ability to offer such a measure "promptly," meaning in a way that would kick the bill back into committee and possibly kill it altogether.
The GOP cried foul, saying that Speaker Nancy Pelosi's rules essentially silence the last gasps of dissent that an opposition party can voice in the majority-rule chamber of Congress. One of Republicans' key objections is that, for complicated reasons related to budget rules, they will now be unable to offer such motions in cases where a tax increase has been buried in larger legislation.
Democrats counter that the minority will still be able to offer amendments to be immediately voted upon -- considered "forthwith," as the formal parlance goes -- rather than weighed in the lengthy committee process. They cite Republicans' frequent use of the procedure, which Democrats only used 36 times during their 12 years of minority status, in accusing the GOP of wielding MTRs as an "obstructionist" tool. "They're not interested in substance," said Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA) after a lengthy House floor explanation of the procedure today. "They're interested in game playing."
If trackers of such House scuffles catch a hint of deja vu in today's proceedings, it's because Democrats mounted similar objections to rules that hush minority input -- back when they were in the minority. In 2004, then-Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi proposed a "Bill of Rights" for the minority party, lamenting the "incivility and the heavy hand of the majority" and accusing Republican Speaker Dennis Hastert of shutting out Democratically-offered alternatives.
Republicans are using that history, as well as Pelosi's past promises of transparency and bipartisanship, to call the new rules not only hypocritical, but counter to the message touted by Democrats' boss himself. "Today's new beginning is nothing more than a new low for the Democratic majority," lamented Rep. David Dreier (R-CA). "Their cynicism and manipulation is all the more dismal against the backdrop of President-elect Obama's vision or hope, unity, and change for the better."
