Editore"s Note
Tilting at Windmills

Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon Sign up for Free News & Updates

August 10, 2010

HOUSE KNOCKS DOWN GOP LAME-DUCK EFFORT.... When a member of the U.S. House takes the oath at the beginning of a Congress, lawmakers get to serve a two-year term. This includes the couple of months after the following election, generally known as the "lame-duck" period.

When there was a Republican majority, GOP officials loved using lame-duck sessions. Wouldn't you know it, their attitudes have evolved now that they're in the minority.

Rep. Tom Price (R-Ga.), the chairman of the Republican Study Committee and one of Congress' more humiliating buffoons, has been absolutely petrified of what might happen in a lame-duck session this year. Price expects Republicans to do very well in November, and is demanding that once the elections are complete, Democrats promise not to even try to do any work after the first week in November -- even if there's unfinished business that needs to be completed.

Democrats have, not surprisingly, mocked the Republican idea that every member of Congress deserves a two-month, taxpayer-paid break, with one aide telling Sam Stein yesterday that Price's resolution has been dubbed the "Republican Winter Vacation Act."

Tea Partiers, FreedomWorks, Americans for Prosperity, and Newt Gingrich all rallied in support of Price's measure, which came to the House floor today. It failed.

House Democrats on Tuesday beat back a GOP attempt to lock them out of a lame-duck session after the midterm elections in November. [...]

Price's resolution was ruled out of order by the presiding officer on the grounds that it did not meet the criteria of affecting the conduct of individual members or the House as a whole. The chair also ruled it violated House rules prohibiting privileged resolutions invoked "to prescribe a special order of business for the House." [...]

Price asked for an appeal of the chair's ruling, and Democrats moved to table that appeal.

The final vote was 236 to 163 to table the measure, effectively killing it.

I'm still not sure what Price and conservatives are so worried about -- bills that can't pass now won't be able to pass in the lame-duck, either. It's not as if the Democratic majority grows or procedural hurdles disappear in November and December.

Besides, all this GOP talk about how inappropriate it is to use the lame-duck to hold important votes would be more persuasive if Republicans hadn't used a lame-duck to impeach the president of the United States.

Steve Benen 2:20 PM Permalink | Trackbacks | Comments (16)

Bookmark and Share
 
Comments

Quote: 'I'm still not sure what Price and conservatives are so worried about -- bills that can't pass now won't be able to pass in the lame-duck, either. It's not the Democratic majority grows or procedural hurdles disappear.'

They just want to establish that even though they're the minority, they still control the agenda. Often, they succeed.

Posted by: BillFromPA on August 10, 2010 at 2:27 PM | PERMALINK

I'm still not sure what Price and conservatives are so worried about -- bills that can't pass now won't be able to pass in the lame-duck, either. It's not the Democratic majority grows or procedural hurdles disappear.

They're worried that once it's official that they've forced some Blue Dog Dems out of their seats in November those Blue Dogs will take revenge by voting for things that they can't vote for now because they're afraid of losing their seats.

It isn't something that any of us believe would happen - I doubt an outgoing Blue Dog is suddenly going to find it acceptable to vote for something in November that he wouldn't vote for now - but that's how Republicans think. If they were in that position they wouldn't hesitate to cast one "screw you" ballot after another in a fit of pique so they just assume everyone else is like that too...

Posted by: NonyNony on August 10, 2010 at 2:29 PM | PERMALINK

Democrats should vow to use the lame duck session to do whatever the hell they want to do, considering the all out war the Republicans have waged on everything that has been in the works since 2006. What goes around comes around.

Posted by: Varecia on August 10, 2010 at 2:48 PM | PERMALINK

I'll tell you why they're worried - take Bob Inglis (R-SC), for example. He'll be in the lame duck session, he's already lost his seat, and he's singing like a canary about the foolishness, stupidity and paranoia of the Tea Partiers; he'll feel free to vote his conscience and belief, instead of toeing the party line. In the Senate, same thing with Bob Bennett (R-Utah).

If the Republicans pick up seats in both chambers but fall short of taking control, lame-duck Republican votes in the post-election session could short-circuit their ability to wreak havoc in the new session; if they do win control, those same lame-duck votes could undermine their supposed legitimacy in opposing Obama every step of the way.

Posted by: blondie on August 10, 2010 at 3:55 PM | PERMALINK

Picking up where the "do-nothing" 109th Congress left off, I see.

Posted by: 2Manchu on August 10, 2010 at 4:03 PM | PERMALINK

I'm with NonyNony and Blondie. Add Stephan Chao as a likely lose by the Republicans who would be an embarrassment voting YES in a Lame Duck session.

And what's the acronym? IOKIRDI? It's Okay If Republicans Do It?

Posted by: Lance on August 10, 2010 at 4:04 PM | PERMALINK

This is just ammunition for Republicants to "prove" that Democrats are anti-freedom, power-hungry commi-sochilists bent on completing the destruction of Amurka in defiance of "the will of the voters."

Everyone knows that the 2006 and 2008 elections were stolen by the evil Democrats.

Posted by: karen marie on August 10, 2010 at 4:13 PM | PERMALINK

blondie -
I'll tell you why they're worried - take Bob Inglis (R-SC), for example.

You know, it never occurred to me that the Republicans might be worried that their own lame ducks might just flip votes on legislation out of spite once they know they're not getting re-elected.

But I think you might be right - that sounds like a real threat.

Posted by: NonyNony on August 10, 2010 at 4:34 PM | PERMALINK

And Robert Gibbs has what to say to the Obstructionist Rs? Are they also on drugs?

Posted by: st john on August 10, 2010 at 4:59 PM | PERMALINK

They are probably counting on the fact that a fair number of people, particularly Tea Party types and Sarah Palin admirers (let's see the Venn diagram on that one), don't understand the electoral and constitutional processes. If the Republicans resoundingly defeat the Democrats in November, they want to be able to say to their followers, "See, the voters rejected the Democrats but they're still doing what they want."

Posted by: navamske on August 10, 2010 at 5:38 PM | PERMALINK

LOOL, You guys are toast in November

Posted by: gary on August 10, 2010 at 7:51 PM | PERMALINK

[...] their attitudes have evolved now that they're in the minority.

Their attitudes couldn't have "evolved", since there's no such thing as "evolution". What has happened is that "they saw the light"...

Posted by: exlibra on August 10, 2010 at 10:10 PM | PERMALINK

"Every time the House makes a move they..."

"The House" is singular, dear, what "they" (plural) are you referring to?

"...but the entire future of the Democrat Party."

There is no "future" for the "Democrat Party" because there is no "Democrat Party." There IS a "Democratic Party" on the other hand... (Why do you think the acronym DNC spelled out is "Democratic National Committee?").

Posted by: daniel rotter on August 11, 2010 at 12:00 AM | PERMALINK

I just LOVE how the Left forgets that they have spent the past 18 months doing what they lamented what the Republicans did....blah blah and then accuse Republicans of being idiots when they then do what the Dems did! Whatever!

The REAL difference is that when Republicans passed laws, even using reconcilliation (which, if you recall - Dems lamented about), the Republicans had the support of the MAJORITY of the PEOPLE. The MAJORITY of this COUNTRY was AGAINST the nonsense passed by this Democrat controlled legislature and all the Dems did was shove it down our collective throats while attacking the vast majority of the country with their elitist, condescending remarks.

LIBERALS are NOT the majority. Get that through your elitist, arrogant thick skulls.

Posted by: FLfreedomfighter on August 11, 2010 at 8:32 AM | PERMALINK

Stick to the topic, "FLfreedomfighter," Democrats never lamented when the Republican-controlled Congress held lame-duck sessions.

Posted by: daniel rotter on August 11, 2010 at 9:18 AM | PERMALINK

The lame duck session will be a revelation to the public, as they will learn exactly what they just voted out of office- unreconstructed socialists who consider America to be their plaything, and would prefer to trash it rather than give it back to the people intact. Fortunately there are enough votes in the Senate to kill it all with a filibuster.

Posted by: Mike on August 11, 2010 at 12:08 PM | PERMALINK




 

 

Read Jonathan Rowe remembrance and articles
Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon Sign up for Free News & Updates

Advertise in WM



buy from Amazon and
support the Monthly