- Jan 12, 2005
- 9,500
- 6
- 81
Those wacky Democrats. Trying to use an old Republican bill (whose intent was to prevent the use of government shutdowns as leverage to force the other side into making concessions - go figure) to get through a fast-track "discharge petition" and force a vote on a "clean CR" in the house.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...ublicans-to-reopen-the-government/?tid=pm_pop
http://blogs.rollcall.com/218/republicans-used-to-like-clean-crs/
Those wacky Democrats, actually believing that Republicans were being principled when they said (see RollCall link)
But back to the original article:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...ublicans-to-reopen-the-government/?tid=pm_pop
This afternoon, Dem Reps. Chris Van Hollen and George Miller will announce that they are introducing a discharge petition for the Lankford bill. They will discuss the procedural ins and outs of this move. The upshot: Once the petition is filed, they will begin rounding up signatures from both Democrats and Republicans. If they can get 218 signatures, a House vote to reopen the government will happen.
Dems say that if they get enough signatures, theyd be able to force a vote by October 14th. Given that House Republicans are now talking about letting the government shutdown battle spill into the fight over the debt limit which expires on October 17th its very possible the government could still be closed at that point.
At a minimum, this should ramp up pressure on moderate Republicans who say they want a vote on a clean CR to make good on their public statements. Presumably, House Republican leaders would put pressure on them not to sign the discharge petition, throwing House GOP intransigence into even sharper relief.
Indeed, Democrats will point out that Republicans have previously supported using clean CRs to avert shutdowns in the past, as Roll Call detailed today.
http://blogs.rollcall.com/218/republicans-used-to-like-clean-crs/
Those wacky Democrats, actually believing that Republicans were being principled when they said (see RollCall link)
Republicans do not want Congress to threaten the American people with a government shutdown, DeMint said at a news conference in 2007.
Ryan, a co-sponsor of the Lankford bill, told Fox News in 2011 that automatic continuing resolutions were needed so we do not have the specter of all these government shutdowns that create all this uncertainty and force a lot of bad decision-making at the last minute.
I dont think either side should be exploiting this, Hensarling said of the shutdown threat in an interview with Roll Call in October 2010. The Texas Republican sponsored the bill back then, and hes a co-sponsor of the Lankford measure, which he confirmed he still supports.
But back to the original article:
This discharge petition would provide them with a vehicle to do just that, even if the House GOP leadership remains opposed to allowing any vote. It will also be interesting to see how Senate Republicans who supported the clean CR in the Upper Chamber some of whom are reportedly growing impatient with the degree to which conservatives are dictating House GOP strategy will react.
The irony here, of course, is that Dems are effectively hijacking a Republican bill in an effort to undercut the whole House GOP strategy.
UPDATE: One slight clarification. If Dems can get the 218 signatures on the discharge petition, then Dems would use a procedural move to replace the Lankford bill with an amendment: A clean CR, just like the one in the Senate. So this would not enshrine the periodic one-percent reductions in spending in the Lankford measure.
