Revealed: the little-known device used to block Democrats in the House

[babylonsister]

Revealed: the little-known device used to block Democrats in the House


Republicans use obscure motion 16 times in a year, compared to just 14 for the Democrats in more than a decade of opposition

Elana Schor in Washington
Wednesday October 24, 2007
Guardian Unlimited

All year long, Democrats in the House of Representatives have watched with increasing impatience as their Senate counterparts find themselves bedevilled by a filibuster-wielding Republican minority. On measures criticising the war in Iraq, the House has passed four since May to the Senate's zero; on annual spending bills, the House has cleared all 12 to the Senate's six.

That Mitch McConnell of Kentucky and his Senate Republican colleagues routinely have blocked the Democrats from getting the needed 60 votes on many measures has received considerable press attention, even inspiring a splashy "anti-obstruction" media campaign.

What's far less well known, though, is that the party has almost as nasty a bugaboo in the House. Republicans there have found stunning success with a procedural tool called the motion to recommit, and they have repeatedly used it to divide the Democratic caucus and block key initiatives.

Sometimes called the MTR, its full name is the motion to recommit, with or without instructions. Ironically offered as a minority-party right by Newt Gingrich in the heyday of the Contract With America, its aim is to allow the often-powerless House minority a chance to shape legislation as it moves toward a vote. Even if Democrats allow no debate on amendments to a bill, the MTR guarantees Republicans a vote - usually minutes before final passage - either on new additions they have written or on forcing the measure back to square one.

Republicans have mastered the game of crafting MTRs they know will force Democrats to defect to their side or risk political consequences, especially among the 60 or so Democrats who represent "red" districts. Some Republicans motions are phrased to ensure a delay of the bill at hand if they pass, compelling Democrats to pull measures from the floor rather than lose precious ground.

more...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,,2198227,00.html?gusrc=rss&feed=networkfront

[Fridays Child]

1. Let's get this to the Greatest page.

[LoZoccolo]

9. Good idea, knock some of the anti-Democratic Party junk off of there for a change. n/t

[MADem]

2. Time for the rules committee to find a way to limit that tool.

Use is one thing, abuse is something entirely different.

[KittyWampus]

4. can you imagine a way to limit the use without outright removing it?

[MADem]

6. Put a time limit on how long they can use the device. Don't let them pull it out

right before a vote. Give them X days after it comes out of committee, and then they have to STFU.

[D23MIURG23]

27. I think it would actually be more effective if the Dems

Just drew a lot of attention to it. I didn't support the "nuclear option" of the repukes, and I still wouldn't if it were the Dems trying it. If the Dems would press their issues more persistantly then I think they would both wear the repigs down some, and project the impression that they are actually fighting for the things that matter. The next time the Republicans fillibuster a war bill the Dems should keep trying to bring it to a vote untill the press can't help but notice, and it looks like they are fighting.

[KittyWampus]

3. In other words, GOP'ers can make rules work for them while Dems allow themselves to be victimized.

Over and over and over.

[Jane Austin]

11. I think the distinction is

that when in the minority, Democrats aren't interested in obstruction for obstruction's sake.

Rethuglicans will apparently do anything to keep Dems from being successful.

[Captain Hilts]

30. The Dem 'majority' is much smaller than that the Repuplicans had. nt

[truedelphi]

50. But at least on issues of the war, the Dems consistently have some

Republicans like Hagel voting up the legisaltion. So it's not simply a case of the numbers they have or haven't got.

May be we need a way that the party can censure creeps like Di Feinstein, who is not even representing her state and her constituents when she votes for the war (again and again)

[Didereaux]

5. Isn't it a rather telling thing that...

We have to get factual coverage of how our governemt runs...by reading a foreign newspaper!

[MelissaB]

7. Ain't that the truth?

[xxqqqzme]

8. I was just about to post the same thing.

You really have to ponder why we get better information from outside the country than inside. Now why is that?

I was watching BBC World News last night for a few minutes on BBCA rather than PBS. It is amazing how different it is. BBCA broadcasts neo-con spin.

[robinlynne]

12. That has been true for years.

not criticizng your post, just saying.

[sam sarrha]

10. they have have also filibustered 45 times this year

[ClintonTyree]

31. Why don't they want to keep their powder dry?

The Dems sure have over the years. They have enough "dry powder" to put a Columbian drug lord to shame.

I just can't understand why the republicans refuse to keep their powder dry, and why are they constantly subverting Democracy? :shrug:

They MUST know something the Dems don't. I guess it's because the will of the people means absolutely nothing to them. Now, the will of the Corporations, the will of the PACS and of the religious wrong.....THERE'S something they understand!

[DissentIsPatriotic]

48. They subvert democracy because they can n/t

[Hydra]

13. Isn't it amazing

that the Repubs have all these tools to throw a monkeywrench in the gears...but we're only finding out about it now, rather than years ago when our party was in the minority and could have been doing the same?

[KoKo]

15. Well...what's amazing is that our Dems don't want the American People to know along with our MSM..

One wonders if there was a conscious effort to put this in the Guardian.

Surely we have Dems in House and Senate who could find a way around this tactic. But, is the "will" there.

[live love laugh]

28. No what is amazing is that you don't hear a peep about it when 'Thugs do it. When Dems did it

it was all over the news (filibustering that is). Remember that ancient "Nuclear Option" that the 'Thugs threatened with for Dem filibusters. Now it's "MTRs"???

When will America be America again? Will America be America ever again?

[D23MIURG23]

29. The difference is in the enthusiasm for the policy

Here is a non verbal contrast:

Republicans: !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Democrats: ...? . . . ?? ! ...? ? .

The Republicans are hell bent: rabidly, insanely motivated to move their (insane) agenda forward while giving the Democrats as little as they possibly can.

The Democrats on the other hand pretty much agree on what the agenda is, although they arent totally sure they should try very hard to accomplish it, and if there is a lot of resistance than that makes it pretty hard... etc.

The Democrats talk tough, but they aren't RUTHLESS.

I know this is probably your point, but I just wanted to spell it out for the hell of it. (Im bored).

[MilesColtrane]

45. If you read the story, you'll see that the past Democratic minority...

...tried using MTR lots of times over the past twelve years.

We only succeeded in blocking legislation that way fourteen times.

The past Republican majorities in the House were like machines voting in unison.

Newt Gingrich used bribes and threats among Republican members to enforce party discipline.

The Democratic party has always been a different animal. (see my sig line)
The mere fact that Democrats are more inclusive makes it difficult to get everyone to march in lockstep.

Hell, we can't even agree on when to hold our primaries.

[DeepModem Mom]

14. K&R

[Joanne98]

16. What happened to the nuclear option?

[Lochloosa]

19. Ask Iran.

[freebrew]

41. The nuclear option needs a VP vote to work.

That's not going to work in the Dems favor since Dick ain't no Dem.

[progressoid]

17. Yet another story about America that Americans won't read or hear about.

Too bad so much quality journalism comes from across the pond and only gets to a few of us.

[Lone_Star_Dem]

18. If this were Democrats doing this while they were in minority the media would tear them apart

Being an obstructionist for the sheer sake of obstructing is what Republicans in minority do best.

[dajoki]

20. Dems seem to be less...

of a threat to repubs since they became the majority. Look at the bills that have passed and the ones that haven't even been brought up for a vote. We used to be "obstructionists" now we're a "do nothing Congress".

[MilesColtrane]

46. That perception will remain until there are enough votes to overturn Bush's veto pen. n/t

[leftynyc]

21. Kick and recommend

We really need to get this to Keith Olbermann. Or someone who can explain it so the average American can understand how it's being used. I'm going to try and email him this thread.

[Froward69]

22. Listen up Polisi,Reed!!!!!!!!

and for godsake quit pandering to those criminals.

[Perry Logan]

33. They didn't pander. The Democrats showed the highest Democratic unity score in 51 years.

"President Bush's success rating in the Democratic-controlled House has fallen this year to a half-century low, and he prevailed on only 14 percent of the 76 roll call votes on which he took a clear position.

"So far this year, Democrats have backed the majority position of their caucus 91 percent of the time on average on such votes. That marks the highest Democratic unity score in 51 years."
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=1728952&mesg_id=1728952
http://public.cq.com/docs/cqt/news110-000002576765.html

Don't let the media rhetoric fool you. The Democrats have acquitted themselves quite well--especially given their bare majority in both houses, and a relentlessly obstructionist Republican minority.

[Froward69]

37. I was aggravated

cheney can tell someone to Fu*# off on the senate floor, and yet when the truth gets told. the repubes complain. I am sick to death over their Hypocrisy. Thank you for this piece of mind.

[tandot]

23. K & R for later reading

[natrat]

24. please...is this an excuse far what democrats have done,,,give me a break

[dpbrown]

25. Why does it take a fucking BRITISH newspaper to write this story?

Knock, knock. Hey, press. Is anyone alive in there???

[Patriot Abroad]

32. English vs. American Parliament

The English look at what happens in Parliament as a contact sport, with the prime minister himself coming in and facing the difficult questions of the day. Most Americans couldn't tell you what actually happens in Congress, other than to make shrill noises that the people in charge aren't getting the job done (and sadly, there seems to be a fair amount of that on these boards). Thus, the English love to see what tricks are used by one party against the other, and how the deals are or aren't made. In the UK it's practically a crisis if the party in power loses even one vote! And I like the European method of having shadow ministers - i.e. officials appointed by the opposition party to shadow the roles of the current sitting Ministers for Health, defense, etc. Imagine having Al Gore currently taking questions as a Shadow Secretary of the Environment, for example.

[redqueen]

39. Well well well...

this is the first I've heard of these shadow ministers. Sounds very interesting. I'm glad you mentioned that, I'll have to read up on it. Thanks. :)

[bdamomma]

47. we have a press that sanitizes us from the news

that is why Europeans are more politically savvy than us. They get the news we do not.

[drm604]

26. UPORDOWNVOTE! UPORDOWNVOTE!

Bunch of hypocrites :mad:

[ChairmanAgnostic]

34. but the dems are so badly led that

they can't even mimic that mantra. Even worse, they never bothered to try the motion to recommit. This is a failure of leadership on the part of Pelosi and Hoyer.

[drm604]

42. Could they block this?

Can the Democrats could actually block this?

[ChairmanAgnostic]

44. if not, they have the majority and can change the rules

newtster changed them for his own benefit.

[Historic NY]

35. Why don't we have leaders with back bones..............

Nancy Pelosi & Harry Reid I'm afraid are going to railroad Democrats success because they are so use to failing. Its time for then to turn the tables on the Republicans and make them bleed like the hemorrhoids they are. Why can't they offer up bills, motions that make their votes critical, and the wonder why congress has lower ratings than the shrub. WAKE UP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[natrat]

36. can you say complicity-a complete bullshit charade

[itsrobert]

38. Nancy Pelosi is not a "little-known device"

Granted she is not very big, but describing a woman as an "object" is sexist.

[stimbox]

40. Tools are very well-known.

Couldn't resist.

[SlowDownFast]

43. K&R. n/t

[truedelphi]

49. So why the hell don't the Democrats use this technique to stall out

The Republicans?
oh I forgot. The Republicans are willing to do what it takes to win their game, whereas the Democrats are not all that interested in winning - they wanna appear to be "nice"