On Saturday, December 12, Erick Erickson of Redstate.com published an article titled "Fight." This short, incisive article presented a crystal clear methodology Republican Senators could use to effectively hobble the monstrosity that has come to be known as "Obamacare." Relying on the many parliamentary procedures specifically created to force slow, careful deliberation on important issues, these tactics, if Republicans conjured the guts to use them, could grind this train wreck to a halt.
Yesterday, Senator Tom Coburn (R-OK) decided to do just that. Senators have the right to request that any amendment offered to pending legislation be read aloud in its entirety. In the interest of time, Senators usually dispense with this rule. Given the way Democrats have been so secretive about the healthcare bill however, the rule seems fortuitous, and makes one wonder why Republicans haven't used it until now.
Republicans claim they have had a plan in place for a while, and a memo from Senator Judd Gregg (R-NH) suggests this is true. According to this theory, they were only waiting to pull out the stops until Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) and the Democrats finally revealed the full bill they've been working on in secret. Still, it is a curious coincidence that Republicans decide to use this tactic the first time only days after it is suggested by one of the most widely-read conservative bloggers.
In any event, when Vermont Socialist Senator Bernie Sanders offered a 767 page amendment to the healthcare bill yesteday, Coburn chose to invoke that rule. What followed was a travesty that should serve as an object lesson to anyone still wavering that these Democrats are corrupt beyond salvation.
The Senate Clerk began to read the amendment. As Redstate's Erickson explained today, Senate rules require that when one senator has the floor, no other senator may take action. Having asked for an amendment to be read, such an amendment must be read in its entirety. According to the Riddicks Senate Procedure guide:
Under Rule XV, paragraph 1, and Senate precedents, an amendment shall be read by the Clerk before it is up for consideration or before the same shall be debated unless a request to waive the reading is granted; in practice that includes an ordinary amendment or an amendment in the nature of a substitute, the reading of which may not be dispensed with except by unanimous consent, and if the request is denied the amendment must be read and further interruptions are not in order. (Emphasis added.)
"...the amendment must be read and further interruptions are not in order." That seems pretty clear, yet when the Democrats realized the reading could take sixteen hours or more, Senator Sanders asked that the amendment be pulled. In defiance of the rules, the Democrats recognized Sanders and pulled the amendment, denying Senator Coburn's 200 year old right to the floor.
The features embedded in this monstrous legislation break every precedent in the book. The enforcement mechanism alone, requiring citizens across the country to purchase government mandated insurance, under threat of criminal liability, is blatantly unconstitutional. The method by which Senate Democrats have shielded the legislation from examination, much less debate, is clearly unethical. The budget estimates used deliberately exclude or hide most of the actual cost are shocking in both duplicity and magnitude.
As Erickson said in today's column, what happened yesterday: "... violates the sacrosanct nature of the Senate’s rules; rules so inviolable that until yesterday neither Democrat nor Republican ever risks crosses [sic] the rules in over 200 years... Hopefully the Senate Republicans now realize they are dealing with third world kleptocrats, not American legislators."
Michelle Bachman has called it "Gangster Government," and this columnist has been detailing Democrats' institutional corruption for years now. See here and here, for example. "Third world kleptocrats..." I couldn't have said it better.
UPDATE: Maryland's Senator Ben Cardin was presiding when Sanders requested to have the amendment pulled. You can read the transcript of when that occurred right here. A fellow Marylander called Cardin's office repeatedly today to obtain an explanation from the Senator as to his justification for breaking a 200-year-old standing rule. The Senator's staff made up one transparent lie after another, claiming first that that the Parliamentarian said it wasn't against the rules, but when asked where that conversation was in the transcript, they had no answer, followed by "we didn't want to break precedent," which of course the caller pointed out that they very much did break precedent. Ultimately, the Senator had no answer. What a surprise!
Comments
Typical tactic used by the socio-commie dumpocrats. If a republican were to pull a stunt like that the corrupt dems would be all over it in a heart beat and calling for censure along with a lengthy investigation. What a bunch of crooks,they think they can get away with this crap and the worst part is they are not being held accountable for their actions by the awful lying media or any other liberal lefty mouth pieces. This just proves exactly how corrupt morally or otherwise these creepy dems really are. They want this awful legislation rammed through no matter the cost or consequences because they want this to be their legacy before they get booted out of office. Obama wants this passed as well so he can leave a legacy as well, public be damned! The liberals, progressives, and other assorted left wing lunatics are the biggest bunch of cynical hypocrites I have ever had the misfortune of witnessing their actions. They are crooks and should be locked behind bars.
The GOP rammed legislation through all the time under Bush... midnight votes, reconciliation, and more.
– The 2001 Bush Tax Cuts [HR 1836, 3/26/01]
– The 2003 Bush Tax Cuts [HR 2, 3/23/03]
– Tax Increase Prevention and Reconciliation Act of 2005 [HR 4297, 5/11/06]
– The Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 [H. Con Res. 95, 12/21/05]
its just that Republicans fall in line and don't voice any objections to fellow party member's bills (with the exception of Ron Paul)like the Democrats have been.
So what's hurting the Democrats is that they have a broad tent of opinions and they dont just fall in line to whatever the party leaders say.
I think the 60 votes non-sense is crazy at this point. THe Dems have a majority and they should use it... 59 to 41. Let Nelson and Lieberman go... they are hardly Democrats and have lost the trust of their party (and hopefully voters in their state)
TH GOP did it - let the Dems!
Whiner:
You are absolutely out of your mind. The Republicans never used such tactics. When they took over Congress in 1994 they changed the old rules that had stifled their ability to have an impact during the rule of the Democrat majority. This gave the Democrats much more power than if Republicans had just left the Democrat rules in place. You have this ass backwards. Check your facts.
Johnny5 you are exactly right.
Jim,
This illustrates how far along things have come, and the
"powers that be" will do what ever it takes.
Johnny5-I think you have it right. I have never seen such outright corruption at least in this country. Example, Nebraska being threatened with a base closing if their senator doesn't vote along party lines for this debacle called health care reform. These people don't even attempt to conceal their corruption. The public was promised transparent legislation processes and they put a health care bill together behind locked doors. Isn't this they way they do "business" in Communist North Korea? And what is even more shocking is the American public goes on with their special coffee's and their cell phones and lets these gangsters get away with whatever they want to do to the United States of America. It's disgusting on so many levels.
Personally, I think this is the best thing that could ever have happened to the country right now. That is that the demorats get to run it into the ground and in the process wake up all the sleeping pundits to the fact that this is what we "don't want" and that the demorats are what this country doesn’t need and never have and are the worst thing in the name of freedom.
If we want to continue living in a free country we have to defeat them in every election in the future but in the same respect we need to watch the party in power so this doesn’t to them too.
I'm confused as to how they broke the parliamentary rules if they asked to pull the amendment from consideration. If they asked didn't read the bill when a senator requested that it be read, that would be a clear violation of the rules. But as I read the rule you have cited, it only pertains to rules that are under consideration. So if something is asked to be withdrawn from consideration, how is that a violation of the rules? Please explain if I am missing something here.
Funny, y'all didn't have a problem when the republican'ts did similar acts during the Bush years. They kept the Medicare part D vote open 4 hours longer than it should have gone on and OPENLY BRIBED a Senator right on the floor of the Senate! But I guess that was okay, because it was your guys, eh? Typical republican't hypocrisy!!!
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!