PELOSI LOWERS THE BOOM

[whopis01]

Source: Drudge

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.

No link yet.

---

Not sure how much to trust things from this source and I haven't seen confirmation of this yet.

However, if it is true it is a good step towards completely shutting down the Republican minority in Congress. Something that should have been done from day one of this Congress.

[madinmaryland]

1. Drudge??

Keeping seeking confirmation.

[whopis01]

13. here you go

http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/gop-threatens-to-shut-down-house-over-rules-change-2007-05-16.html

[Terre]

29. UPDATE at The Hill

House members call temporary truce on procedural battle.
http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/house-members-call-temporary-truce-on-procedural-battle-2007-05-16.html

Republicans (except the few good ones left) are such WATB's.

[wicket]

2. "Not sure how much to trust things from this source"

That's easy - NEVER! :D :hi:

[aquart]

3. No. It should be a last resort and obviously is.

This is a democracy. Majority rules but every voice matters. The Republicans have altered this to minority rule and that must change. What has to be remembered is that what's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. The next Republican majority will feel as free as ever to do the same to the Dems. That's why this is a last resort.

[whopis01]

14. Normally I would agree with you

But I now believe that these times call for such measures.

If we sit back and allow the Republicans to continue to act the way they have for years and continue to treat them as a valid politcal party engaged in the democratic process, the nation will suffer.

It is time to use last resorts. Frankly it is time to ensure that there will not be a next Republican majority. They should all be punished for their crimes.

[JPettus]

30. Sorry, I can't agree

The Repugs did their best to remove representational government when they were in charge. If we do the same thing (1) it makes us no better than they, regardless of our claims for the greater good, and (2) eventually power swings back and forth and when the Dems are next out of power do you want to remove their ability to use whatever procedural weapons remain to attempt to do the right thing?

[Lasher]

36. I agree we should try to take the moral high ground.

However, if we respect Publicans' rights now while they are in the minority we can not assume they will reply in kind when they are again in control of Congress.

Worst Congress Ever

[Igel]

43. This particular rule was set in 1822.

The repubs let it stand when they were a majority, preserving a right that dems could (did?) take advantage of. In other words, in this case it's the dems who aren't replying in kind ... and I'm sure if the repubs gain power and *do* reply in kind, they'll be judged harshly by dems.

[Honeycombe8]

47. My head agrees with you. (My heart wants to bar them, though.)

My heart is with the argument to bar them, but the Dems lose the moral ground if they do. Part of the complaints against the Republican Congress was the egregious way they treated the minority Dems, leaving them out of the loop and not giving them a voice many times.

If there is karma, barring the Republicans could come back to hurt the Dems in the long run, the way the Republicans are being hurt now by their past behavior.

(But darn it...I would exactly be upset if Pelosi decided to go ahead and do that.)

[Name removed]

18. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[BOSSHOG]

4. "Losing a string of embarrassing votes"

How quaint. Constitution hating republican scum vote against democratic proposals to save the fucking country. Madame Speaker is not the one who should be embarrassed. Can you imagine the likes of drudge, limbaugh, hannity trying to make an honest living.

[Monkeyman]

5. Yep

[sabbat hunter]

6. one wee problem

if the democratic party were to ever lose control of the house again, it would screw us over then.

I think this is a bad move.

instead the democratic party should work to get the word out how the republicans are blocking us from doing what we were elected for.

[Duer 157099]

21. ...and that would be different from the past 12 years how?

We already know that when the Rs are in power they shut the Ds up/out.

[KansDem]

45. Yes, have we forgotten the basement broom-closets for Dem hearings?

On Wednesday, the Congressional Progressive Caucus – now the largest caucus in Congress with 69 members – co-hosted a panel discussion along with The Nation and the Institute for Policy Studies on its new Progressive Promise for America. The event took place in the Rayburn House Office Building, a long way from the Capitol basement where the Caucus was founded fifteen years ago by then-Congressman Bernie Sanders and four colleagues. Even in the last few years when Caucus Co-Chair, Congresswoman Lynn Woolsey, held hearings on Iraq, the Republicans relegated those hearings to the basement.

But now Caucus members chair the majority of committees and subcommittees in the House, and thirteen members participated in the panel even as they came and went to oversee their respective committee hearings. In attendance were: Representatives Barbara Lee, Lynn Woolsey, John Conyers, Dennis Kucinich, Charles Rangel, Sheila Jackson-Lee, Bob Filner, Diane Watson, Barney Frank, Maxine Waters, Maurice Hinchey, Keith Ellison, and Steve Cohen. The Nation's own John Nichols served as a nimble, historically astute, and diplomatic moderator.

--more--
The Nation

This hearing and many others...

[AlCzervik]

7. no offense subby but i'll wait for another source before i believe any of it.

[whopis01]

11. here you go

http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/gop-threatens-to-shut-down-house-over-rules-change-2007-05-16.html

[Purveyor]

8. From The Hill: GOP threatens to shut down House over rules change

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.

---eoe---

http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/gop-threatens-to-shut-down-house-over-rules-change-2007-05-16.html

[closeupready]

9. Well, they do know what they are talking about when they say "abuse of power."

:evilgrin:

[AlCzervik]

16. the gop doesn't want to vote on defense authorization bill, they don't want to

go on the record so they're delaying the bill coming to the floor.

[Prophet 451]

35. Pot, meet Kettle

“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.”

Coming from the party that was desperatly trying to change the rules on filibustering so they could abuse their power by stuffing the courts with idealogues, that wins my award for most shameless hypocracy so far this year.

[Prisoner_Number_Six]

10. A really simple way to save face

PUT IMPEACHMENT ON THE TABLE.

[xultar]

12. BUHWAWAWAWAWA! No class. NO. FUCKING. CLASS.

[slackmaster]

15. I don't trust the source much

No comment until I see a fully credible account of this.

[whopis01]

17. here you go

http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/gop-threatens-to-shut-down-house-over-rules-change-2007-05-16.html

[slackmaster]

19. "...Democratic leadership allegedly planned to change the germaneness rule"

OK, some Republicans are stamping their feet.

Still no credible confiration that the Democratic leadership has said any such thing.

[Tiggeroshii]

20. It looks like thi is just something the Republicans want us to believe so that

they can delay the defense bill as much as they can. There seems to be no evidence the democrats are doing whtis being claimed

[stillcool]

22. that is the un-trusted source...

For instance...per your link...

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.

[0rganism]

23. what pisses me off is not that Republicans are doing this...

...but that Democrats DIDN'T!

Until the 2006 elections, the GOP had been the majority party in the house since what, 1994? Twelve years, right? Think they'd be a little slow to adjust, right? But it didn't take 'em long as a minority party to figure out how to work the system to generate a virtual filibuster.

I don't recall the Democrats alerting the press about the alarming rules the GOP imposed, much less slowing down the legislative process through "procedural maneuvering."

[MGKrebs]

24. No shit.

wtf.

[fob]

26. Word up on that.

The Dems should have asked for a little "germaneness" for a month or two solid before the IWR vote.

Hey, republicks! I got some germaneness right here.

[samfishX]

31. Why would they have asked that?

Most of the Democrats were so far up Bush and his Neocon buddies' asses in the run-up to the Iraq war that even if you showed them the future in a time machine they'd still have voted for the God damn thing.

We need to stop trying to excuse the Democrats who voted for the war. They knew it was bullshit. We all did!
They were spineless and the Republicans were whores. That's all there is to it!

[OnyxCollie]

34. Yep. They all took a gamble that WMD would turn up in Iraq.

Of those who voted for the war, I can't imagine the possiblilty-of-crushing-defeat-in-the-upcoming-election-due-to-refusal-to-defend-America hadn't crossed their minds.

[CreekDog]

25. First reaction: Good!

Second reaction: to deal with what?

Third, informed reaction: Good! Keep it up.

[Jillian]

27. If this is true

good for her.

Nothing is getting done.
Congress' approval numbers are as bad as chimpy's.

[Nictuku]

28. We need Republican Votes

Nothing can get done in congress, including impeachment, without Republican votes. Democrats do not have enough of a majority (yet). Dems have to play their cards right here. They need to keep the pressure on, definitely. Keep the republics on the defense.

[samfishX]

32. Even though I feel no sympathy for the Repugs...

This is a stupid, bad thing to do. Especially since the media is going to start a "poor, poor Republicans, EVIL EVIL Democrats" narrative over this..

As much as I love seeing the Repuglicans getting a taste of their own medicine, I'd rather the Democrats try and rise above the fray rather than stoop to their level.

I imagine some folks would call me naive for thinking that and say, "That's just politics!" but I think it's about high time we REALLY started trying to hold our politicians to a higher standard.

[maxrandb]

38. I look at it another way

The elections of 2006, and Chimpy's 25% approval rating, are a clear indication that the American people want to step on the neck of the Republic Party.

Let them be obstructionist. If they continue to turn a deaf ear to 75% of the country, they'll ensure themselves permanent minority status.

The American people have clearly spoken. They want to stomp a bloody hole in the Republic Party.

[ShaneGR]

33. I completely disagree with this, didn't we say we wouldnt make these changes?

We won of over a LOT of voters saying we would bring fairness and open debate back to congress. I'm not sure how changing rules that havent been changed for 185 years fullfils that promise.

[w4rma]

37. Something has to be done about Republican obstructionism.

More people get sick and more people die, every single day, because of Republican obstructionism of required services.

[phoreten]

39. Mistake! This is not good press. Here is the GOP response:

From NRO Corner: http://corner.nationalreview.com/

Pelosi’s Gambit

DEMOCRATS TO CHANGE 185 YEAR-OLD HOUSE RULE TO ALLOW TAX HIKES WITHOUT HAVING TO VOTE

May 16, 2007

In a stunning move, House Democrats today revealed they will attempt to rewrite House rules that have gone unchanged since 1822 in order to make it possible to increase taxes and government spending without having to vote and be held accountable. House Republican Leader John Boehner (R-OH) today vowed Republicans will use every available means to fight this unprecedented change.

“This is an astonishing attempt by the majority leadership to duck accountability for tax-and-spend policies the American people do not want,” Boehner said. “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.”

Last November, House Democratic leaders promised the most open, ethical Congress in history:

“e promised the American people that we would have the most honest and most open government and we will.” (Nancy Pelosi press stakeout, December 6, 2006)

“We intend to have a Rules Committee ... that gives opposition voices and alternative proposals the ability to be heard and considered on the floor of the House.” (Steny Hoyer in CongressDaily PM, December 5, 2006)

The rules House Democrats are seeking to change have not been changed since 1822.

Republicans have already achieved significant legislative successes on the House floor with 11 consecutive “motion-to-recommit” victories that exposed flaws and substantively improved weaknesses in underlying Democrat bills. But rather than living by the same rules which have guided the House of Representatives for 185 years, Democrats are proposing to change the rules in order to game the system and raise taxes and increase spending without a House vote.

[Robbien]

40. Thanks so much for your "concern"

It is oh so very nice that you are oh so very "concerned" about the bad press Dems may be receiving from the rabid right wing rag known as the NRO Corner.

So you believe that the GOP should be allowed to run the House votes because if the Dems try and assume the power the voters gave them, right wingers over at the Corner are going to say bad stuff about Dems?

And you are "concerned"

Not buying it.

[phoreten]

41. Change the rules now and in 2 years they make work against us.

There is nothing written that says Dems will keep Congress is there? Whatever change we make now to "benefit" us will be used against us the next time the GOP runs it.

Do you really think we can control Congress indefinately? Take a look at the 29% approval rating out on Congress. It doesn't appear many in America are taking a liking to the activity there.

[Robbien]

42. The rules are not being changed

Pelosi was just allowing the minority to have a voice.

But now she is going to use the GOPer rules of procedure. You know the rules of procedure GOPers have been using the last six years to completely shut out the Dems.

Again. Thank you for your "concern". Is is oh so very nice of you to show your "concern" and point out what you feel is a dumb Dem mistake.

I see the cause of your real "concern". How nervous it must make you that GOPer power may be reined in.

[Igel]

44. "Pelosi was just allowing the minority to have a voice."

She was being kind. After all, not crushing minorities is a sign of kindness--naive, simple-minded kindness, perhaps, but kindness. In denying them a voice, she must be the opposite--mean.

But in being kind, she was using the "GOPer rules of procedure".

In being mean, she'd be using, apparently, the non-GOPer rules, and since the only real non-GOPers in Congress are dems, she'd be using dem rules.

Hey, wait a minute ... you're trying to fool us. The only possible inference is you were calling GOPers kind ... and by extension, you're calling dems mean. Would a true dem really do such a thing?

"How nervous it must make you that GOPer power may be reined in."

:sarcasm:

[lonestarnot]

46. Rugh ro.

Don't like the sounds of this.