| About Us | Contact | Donate | User Blogs | Login |
Congressional Process Reform
Here is a great example of a story that Republicans should be using to regain their credibility, instead of simply bashing Democrats. The Republican Whip blog (of Eric Cantor) says Democrats are shutting the House GOP out of the process.
In a completely unprecedented fashion, House Democrats have used their power as the majority party to shut out floor amendments from the minority party on spending legislation. Right at the beginning of the debate, House Democrats decided to go to the Rules Committee, to report out a Structured Rule and shut the House GOP out of the process.
So, Republicans (who spent years in the majority strong-arming legislation, bending the rules and shutting out Democrats) are now upset that Democrats are abusing their power. My sympathy is a bit limited. However, Democrats spent those same years complaining about the Republican abuses of power, so "Republicans did stuff too!" isn't really an excuse.
This does offer a good excuse to review some Nancy Pelosi quotes from years past, though.
- “Every person in America has a right to have his or her voice heard. No Member of Congress should be silenced on the floor…guaranteeing that the voices of all the people are heard.” - Nancy Pelosi, 2008
- "House Republicans might have their doubts, but Minority Leader Pelosi says a Democratic majority next year would place a heavy emphasis on bipartisanship — and would offer the Republicans minority rights often denied Democrats now." - National Journal on Nancy Pelosi, 2006
- "It's not about a defeat, it's about a decision. I certainly would not say that we can't bring things to the floor because we'll lose ... [Republicans] are afraid of ideas. That's why we can't have amendments, substitutes, and all the rest for the most part." - National Journal on Nancy Pelosi, 2006
- "I'm a big believer in bipartisanship on so many issues. You can't address the entitlement issue, the healthcare issue, and do it in a partisan way. They are too big, they involve too many people, and they involve too much money, private and public money. You've got to do it in a way that has legitimacy." - Nancy Pelosi, 2006
Frankly, the solution is a much more granular, well-defined and transparent process that doesn't allow politicians to do the horse-trading and ad hoc deal-making that corrupts legislation so much.
At this point, both Congressional Republicans and Democrats are pretty unpopular, and the public trend is towards higher "independent" identification. Forget bashing Democrats; Republicans need to sell the public on Republicans. "Democrats suck" is not really a selling point for Republicans.
This issue is, again, a place where Republicans could build credibility and set themselves apart from Democrats by working with bipartisan outside groups to develop an objective, fair, accountable and rational process for legislation, abiding by it (to the extent possible) now, and making a public, written and enforceable commitment to adopt it once they regain the majority.
If Republicans are serious about both reforming the party and ensuring good governance, they could do that and do it now. Campaign rhetoric about "fixing the problems" if they regain the majority are likely to be as empty as those from the Democrats were.
- Jon Henke's blog
- Login or register to post comments


Comments
Enforceable?
How would any such arrangement be enforceable? Not a rhetorical question; I'm genuinely curious. Do you have a mechanism in mind? Given the behavior of Pelosi, it seems like any such agreement would be tough to structure beforehand (they could always claim that circumstances had changed, etc etc, and just talk the whole thing to death); and i'm not clear on what consequences could ensue even if there was a written procedure.
re: Enforceable?
Contracts. They're free to commit themselves to support a policy, vote against a Republican leader who does not follow through, etc, and define a penalty. They could stipulate that the State GOP or National Committees make future support contingent upon follow-through.
Jon, help me with this one?
when has a process argument won an election?
Voters around where I live pay very close attention to foreclosures, gasoline prices, taxes and the balance of their 401 K. Whether a minority subsitute was subject to a cloture vote, not so much.
If the point is to argue the Democrats are out of control, better to point to examples where such blind partisanship inflicts damage on nonpoliticians.
re: Jon, help me with this one?
Process itself does not win. But if the public is disgusted with Congress because of process issues (partisan sniping, duplicity, bullying, etc), then it is an opportunity to do something that will improve the Republican brand. The benefit to Republicans is two-fold: 1) this is good policy, and 2) Republicans look good for taking the iniative to do the right thing, rather than just beating up Democrats.
Process doesn't win elections. End of case study.
The only ones who really benefit from and want "process integrity" in politically-driven govt budgeting are the watchtanks, the media and anyone else who profits from selling govt as a corrupt, evil institution.
Former GOP Prez candidate McCain argued far, far past the nonsense of process integrity via transparency. He wanted to end earmarks entirely. Period. He wanted to use a hatchet, not a scapel, in cutting waste, inefficiencies and irresponsible spending out of the federal budget.
I get it that some pencil pushing grunts inside various DC-centered think tanks MIGHT want to push a process reform --because it helps them sell issues, sell ideas, milk money from angry taxpayers, etc-- but it's not much more than an attempt to make their individual jobs a tad easier... that puts 'em in the same boat as lazy journalists. Frankly, if I found myself in that boat, I'd cut bait fast.
Nawh, the answer is meaningful reform in the way Congress manages the budgeting process. Ending earmarks. Cutting discretionary and non-discretionary spending by 10%. Eliminating various federal agencies 9take your pick, there are tons in need). Reforming criteria for entitlement programs so that people paying in are the people being served by the program --not a single dime for anyone who didn't pay in, didn't do the job that entitles their spouse & everyone else to a benefit.
That means, for instance, we don't pay assisted living expenses for widows of people who actually fought in WWII. That means, for instance, we don't pay drug-addled minors SS benefits when they didn't contribute to the program. That means, for instance, we don't pay farmers not to farm certain crops.
And no tax dollar ought to be tranferred to any foreign enterprise without complete disclosure and vetting before the appropos Congressional committee.
That'll end the need for any tax hikes in the near future.
Give me a pencil pushing grunt inside a DC-centered think tank still selling anger to the taxpayers and I'll show you a person "hot" for process changes rather than meaningful reform.
The GOP isn't going to makeover its brand by arguing we should make the job of policy grunts easier.
This is clearly an incredibly salient issue for huge #s of ppl
Meanwhile, how about a two-fer that's actually something highly salient to millions of Americans? At the same time as the GOP would be solving a problem, they could make the Dems look very, very bad.
The Dems - and some corrupt Republicans - are pushing the DREAM Act, an explicitly anti-American bill that would let those illegal aliens covered under the bill take college educations away from U.S. citizens. Any American who supports that bill is turning their back on their fellow citizens in order to support foreign citizens. That's something that anyone can understand and could be used to almost completely discredit its supporters.
At the same time as doing that, the GOP could present some form of repatriation assistance for those affected and can put pressure on the sending countries to make sure that they do the right thing.
Needless to say, the GOP isn't going to do that; those checks from business groups are just too tempting. Instead, various consultants will come up with various plans. And, when that doesn't work, there's always standing on a street corner holding up a loopy sign. And, when that doesn't work, they'll try "Teabag 2.0: Oolong to the Rescue!"
Blather is on the money...
with a name if he/she would just drop the "no more" part of no more blather.
Sorry pal, it isn't a matter of the business groups sending contributions to the GOP... the problem is that guys like you and other soc-cons stayed home on Election Day and tossed the election over to Obama and the farLeft.
McCain tried valiantly to get a responsible, balanced, prudent immigration reform package passed in the summer of 07, but the sit-on-their-ass soc-cons didn't like it and, with a good dose of "let's teach them wetbacks a few lessons" guys like you torpedoed the package and it went down in flames. Not only that, your stunt helped drive a wedge into the Latina vote and all the hard work of Reagan, Bush 41 and Bush 43 to develop and HOLD the Latino vote went up in bigtory flames.
Now, BarryO and the farLeft guys from your end of the shallow pool helped install in govt have a different idea. And it's tough times for the soc-con rednecks who abandoned the Party in 2008... time to lose some control over your future and meet the real harsh end of political paybacks.
I hope the GOP leadership in the House and Senate let all these kinds of bills go forward. Frankly, I'd like to see a federal mandate that redneck bigots have to learn Spanish or else they lose their guns, their trailer and their 8 track tapes. It's payback time. I hope the GOP doesn't carry the water opposing DADT repeal, gay marriage equality in income tax issues, gay adoption, special benefits for alien immigrants and a lot of other items that will ring the soc-con's collective bell.
Payback.
You continue to have no clue
I don't think I qualify as a "soc con", and comprehensive immigration reform is horrific public policy. If someone coherent wants to make whatever other points Michigan Mike made (if any), I might respond to them.
optometrists
I found your blog on google and read a few of your other posts. I just added you to my Google News Reader. Keep up the good work. Look forward to reading more from you in the future. Please come visit my site eye surgeons when you got time.
Really great work.
Really great work. Congrats to everyone who are involved with this project. The website layout and graphics are really cool. Please come visit my site office supply stores when you got time.
Awesome! I have read a
Awesome! I have read a lot on this topic, but you definitely give it a good vibe. This is a great post. Will be back to read more! Feel free to check out my site body shop when you got time.
I wanted to thank you for
I wanted to thank you for this great read!! I definitely enjoying every little bit of it :) I have you bookmarked to check out new stuff you post. Please visit my Please visit my blog when you have time I would love some feedback on my site eye care when you got time.
Shutting out the Republicans.
Shutting out Republicans was the objective of the Democrats right from the beginning. The only ones allowed to speak are the ones in the back pockets of the same people that also contain the democrats. That may be a stretch, but to the every day American, this is how it seems. Casino Online