Dems On GOP Complaints About Rules: You Started It!

[Jennicut]

Democrats are pushing back against Republican indignation over the potential path the House will use to pass health care reform this week. Despite Republicans insisting the "deem and pass" tactic is totally unprecedented, it's a maneuver the GOP should actually be familiar with.

The Democratic National Committee sends over a 2006 article from Roll Call with stats showing how the Republicans actually "set new records" for writing House floor rules that allow leadership to pass their bills with an easier path.

From that Role Call article Dems are using, written June 19, 2006:

Former House GOP Rules Committee Chief Of Staff Don Wolfensberger: Republicans "Set New Records" For Using Self-Executing Rule.

Self-executing rules began innocently enough in the 1970s as a way of making technical corrections to bills. But, as the House became more partisan in the 1980s, the majority leadership was empowered by its caucus to take all necessary steps to pass the party's bills. This included a Rules Committee that was used more creatively to devise procedures to all but guarantee policy success.

The self-executing rule was one such device to make substantive changes in legislation while ensuring majority passage. ... When Republicans took power in 1995, they soon lost their aversion to self-executing rules and proceeded to set new records under Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.).

There were 38 and 52 self-executing rules in the 104th and 105th Congresses (1995-1998), making up 25 percent and 35 percent of all rules, respectively.

Under Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) there were 40, 42 and 30 self-executing rules in the 106th, 107th and 108th Congresses (22 percent, 37 percent and 22 percent, respectively). Thus far in the 109th Congress, self-executing rules make up about 16 percent of all rules."

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/03/dems-say-gop-crying-crocodile-tears-with-rules-complaints-republicans-set-records-for-same-process.php

In other words, it is only bad when Dems do it, right?

[ShortnFiery]

1. What blows my mind is that our progressive democrats would not go to the mat for the PO

or, better yet, initially put Single Payer on the negotiating table, but NOW when it comes to SERVING THE INSURANCE CARTEL with their beloved MANDATE GIFT, our democratic "leaders" are getting tough.

I'm so damn disgusted with them. THIS is what they will fight for? For the God DAMN Insurance Cartel and Big Pharma, NOT the American Working Classes. :grr: :nuke: :grr:

[Jennicut]

2. Oh, I agree with you about the PO.

But I doubt the votes in the Senate were ever there. The little public option letter was never signed by 50 Dems in the Senate, was it?

[ShortnFiery]

3. They didn't even TRY!?! But now when those previously made back room deals are on the line ...

Nancy and Harry are getting all MEDIEVAL on our asses.

How pathetic is this? Showing courage for the BIG MONEY? :puke:

Dammit! I'm not ever voting for another Corporate Whore Democrat!

NEVER AGAIN! :grr:

[Jennicut]

4. They are all corporate owned.

How else do you get in the Senate?
The House really is not to blame.

[ProSense]

5. Maybe if people stopped mischaracterizing the legislation

they'd realize that this is as good, and can be improved on. The legislation they are going to mat for is the bill the majority agreed to. The majority is not progressive.

[ShortnFiery]

6. The legislation, as is in the Senate bill is one big TROJAN HORSE filled with mandates without

proper provisions (PO or single payer) to hold down Insurance Cartel Premiums.

People will get the MINIMUMS and many will hardly able to afford THAT TRASH.

It's so wrong to pass this Senate Bill ... remember NAFTA? Just as DAMAGING, if not more so.

[ProSense]

7. The bill has been completely mischaracterized by opponents right

and left.

[Cha]

8. There are no bigger whining disingenuous hyporcrites

than the republicons trying to stop President Obama on Anything he does..so taking that into consideration..the Dems have every right to use the rules to their advantage.

Elections have consequences.