Boehner: Dems changing House rules, to increase taxes without a vote

[Little-Acorn]

If true, this one is nothing short of astonishing. Though it wouldn't actually be too far out of character for the Democrats. They have consistently governed against the will of the people, especially on economic issues. Trying to eliminate full House votes in issues such as raising taxes, would simply be a way to raise them without having to account to their constituents by name.

The Constitution says that any bill must be "passed by the House" (and Senate) before going to the President for signature. But it doesn't define what "passed" means - that is left up to the House (and Senate) to decide for themselves. The House can require a majority vote, or a 60% vote, or etc., as it pleases. Presently, they require a majority vote.

I'm not clear on how a change to the germaneness rule, would eliminate a full House vote, though. I hope Boehner elaborates on his statements.

-------------------------------------

GOP threatens to shut down House over rules change

By Jackie Kucinich
May 16, 2007

House Republicans Wednesday threatened to shut down House business by calling a series of procedural votes until the Democratic leadership assured them that rules governing key parliamentary procedures would go unchanged.
Republicans began their assault in the mid-afternoon after hearing that the Democratic leadership allegedly planned to change the germaneness rule, which would limit the ability of the minority to challenge provisions in a bill on the floor.

“This is an astonishing attempt by the majority leadership to duck accountability for tax-and-spend policies the American people do not want,” said House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio). “The majority leadership is gutting House rules that have been in place for 185 years so they can raise taxes and increase government spending without a vote. House Republicans will use every tool available to fight this abuse of power.”

Stacey Bernard, a spokeswoman for House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.), said the Republican antics were counterproductive and that they had not even seen the content of the bill they were protesting.

“They are delaying a bill that is critical,” she said, referring to the defense authorization bill that was scheduled to come to the floor. “They don’t know what they are doing.”

A GOP leadership aide said if the rule were changed, Republicans would continue to call the procedural votes and begin to thwart progress on the committee level as well.

“We will bring down the House,” the aide said.

http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/...007-05-16.html

[Kathianne]

Luckily it didn't work, though I am concerned about the bottom paragraph:

http://powerlineblog.com/archives/017658.php

May 16, 2007
Breaking News from the House

Since January, House Republicans have had quite a bit of success at frustrating Democratic legislation through motions to recommit. The virtue of the motion to recommit, as I understand it, is that it forces Democrats to go on record, and some have been unwilling to follow their leadership on measures that are unpopular back home.

We've just learned that the Democrats are now striking back by, as a reader puts it:

...threatening to change the current House Rules regarding the Republican right to the Motion to Recommit (specifically on "paygo" provisions) or the test of germaneness on the motion to recommit. This would be the first change to the germaneness rule since 1822. That's wonk-speak for making it easier to raise taxes, without forcing their Members to take the tough votes on the record.

The Republicans have responded by shutting down the House with one procedural motion after another. Congressman Eric Cantor explains what is happening on his web site:

Bottom line - the Democrats are preventing their Members from having to vote on the tax increases that they are trying to impose on the American People.

We will post updates as they become available. This seems like a good time to call or email your Congressman.

UPDATE: More here. Our source writes:

The Dems are beginning to feel the heat. There is a rumor that they might be about to fold their hand, but that's only a rumor. One way or another, it seems to be working. House GOP is sticking together.

FURTHER UPDATE: It's over. House Republicans are proclaiming victory as Nancy Pelosi and Steny Hoyer have abandoned their effort to change the rules to allow their majority to operate with more stealth.

Let's give some credit to conservatives in the House. The conventional wisdom is that in the House, unlike the Senate, the minority is more or less powerless. But the House Republicans seem to be well led and to be using effective tactics. They have foiled a number of pieces of bad and unpopular legislation with motions to recommit; hence today's effort by the Democrats to change the rules to take that option away from the minority.

PAUL adds: Speaking of the Senate, rumor has it that Republicans there are about to cave on immigration reform and join forces with Ted Kennedy. You could tell this was probably in the works from the comments of Senators Brownback and (especially) McCain during the debate last night. No Senator who is a party to this capitulation will get my vote in the Republican presidential primary.

[Hagbard Celine]

I don't trust anybody who is named after an erection.

[stephanie]

I'm loving...... watching the Dems.........implode...

[KitchenKitten99]

I'm loving...... watching the Dems.........implode...

great, cheap entertainment isn't it??

[musicman]

I don't trust anybody who is named after an erection.

Ah - it took me a minute. No, the man's name is actually pronounced, "Bay-ner".

What say you to the substance of the post?

[stephanie]

great, cheap entertainment isn't it??

[Hagbard Celine]

What say you to the substance of the post?

I think the Republicans don't want to lose what little power they have left, so they've spun an attempt by the democrats to further limit that power to make the dems look bad while simultaneously stalling the new Iraq spending bill that the dems have produced. Typical. If you'll recall, the dems used the same kinds of tactics against the reps when they were the minority. Shocking, isn't it(?), that people are playing politics in the halls of Congress

[musicman]

I think the Republicans don't want to lose what little power they have left, so they've spun an attempt by the democrats to further limit that power to make the dems look bad while simultaneously stalling the new Iraq spending bill that the dems have produced. Typical. If you'll recall, the dems used the same kinds of tactics against the reps when they were the minority. Shocking, isn't it(?), that people are playing politics in the halls of Congress

So, the fact that Democrats are trying to circumvent accountability doesn't give you pause?

[Hagbard Celine]

So, the fact that Democrats are trying to circumvent accountability doesn't give you pause?

It gives me pause, but they can't really circumvent it. Not really. Everything they passed would still have to jive with what the Senate passes and then the president would have veto power over them. Anyway, you didn't have a problem with "accountability" back when the Republican-controlled congress was passing its agenda without pause. They didn't even have to worry about the Presidential veto--they had carte blanche. I was really worried they were going to write discrimation into the constitution--luckily that didn't happen. But I didn't hear any of the conservative posters on this board bellyaching about "accountability" back then. I guess everyone has a double standard when it comes to politics.

[musicman]

It gives me pause, but they can't really circumvent it. Not really. Everything they passed would still have to jive with what the Senate passes and then the president would have veto power over them.

So, an attempted end-run around an accountability check that's been in place for 185 years is OK with you? Because it wouldn't really stick? Hiding from truth and openness is just fine? You don't think it sets a bad precedent?

Anyway, you didn't have a problem with "accountability" back when the Republican-controlled congress was passing its agenda without pause.

The Republicans stood accountable to the voters. They didn't try this clever little game to dodge accountability. Accountability is the bedrock of our system of representative government. When a party tries to dislodge it, you can't just laugh that off and call it politics. That which moves away from accountability to the voters is moving toward tyranny.

[Kathianne]

What I was afraid of, Hugh Hewitt has more:

http://hughhewitt.townhall.com/g/b43...0-ee8cf732427d

Wednesday, May 16, 2007
A Disaster: The GOP Caves On Border Security
Posted by Hugh Hewitt | 6:32 PM

Word is leaking that the GOP in the Senate are on the verge of agreeing to an immigration bill that has --as a concession to the GOP-- less than half of the fencing promised by law last year.

White flag time on the border, and a national security and thus a political disaster.

The GOP are sending around talking points attempting to make this "compromise" defensible, but it won't and shouldn't fly. Agreeing to it takes the party down the tubes on the issue of border security --because it doesn't provide what the public understands to be border security, a very long, very high fence with a very wide gate.

This is McCain's continuing gift to the GOP, and the immigration absolutists' legacy: Lots and lots of promises and no fence worth calling a fence.

Aren't there 41 GOP senators willing to fight for border security? Apparently not. And they will see the result in their depleted coffers and diminished numbers come November '08. All they have to do is fight for border security, but they won't even do that.

UPDATE: Here are the draft talking points from the GOP. Four pages of crap:

BORDER SECURITY AND IMMIGRATION REFORM

Republicans Standing Together to Fight for Tougher Enforcement and an Immigration System That Better Serves American Interests



...

[musicman]

What I was afraid of, Hugh Hewitt has more:

http://hughhewitt.townhall.com/g/b43...0-ee8cf732427d

A moment of silence, please, for the Republican Party.

[Kathianne]

A moment of silence, please, for the Republican Party.

Yup! Rep for you and me for recognizing. Obviously only to you! LOL! Actually, cry.