“An ugly finish to a rocky start … That's no way to do business, and Democrats know it.”
(Washington Post editorial, 8/6/07)
Table of Contents
PROLOGUE: Tuesday, July 31, 7:30 p.m.
Hollow words and empty promises from the Majority Leader
In an initial demonstration of the way in which Democrat leaders would run the House in its last 100 hours of business before the August recess, Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD) pulled the Agriculture spending bill from the floor and threatened to bring it back with restricted consideration of amendments, breaking long-standing tradition providing for open rules on all Appropriations measures.
Rep. Hoyer’s threat came in response to Republican attempts to hold Democrat leaders accountable for bringing to the floor a major piece of legislation without proper due process. According to Congressional Quarterly: “Republicans were furious that a children’s health bill (HR 3162) will be debated later this week under highly restrictive rules, and they used the Agriculture spending bill to air their grievances.” (CQ Today, 7/31/07)
In a subsequent colloquy with Republican Leader John Boehner (R-OH), Rep. Hoyer said:
“Ladies and gentlemen of the House, obviously, the American public sent us here to get its work done. … I hope that those of you on the minority side who have dealt with me through the years believe that I try to treat one another as I want to be treated by them. … What is not fair, from our perspective, is to simply disallow the House to proceed to do its business, to have its disagreements, to make its votes, to express its will.”
Unfortunately for the American people, those words would ring hollow in the days ahead.
Wednesday, August 1, 3:10 a.m.
A 465-page SCHIP bill loaded up with anonymous earmarks and rewritten in the middle of the night
Just hours after Rep. Hoyer spoke, Democrats proceeded to violate House rules and break their promises by proposing a 465-page bill to hugely expand the SCHIP program far beyond its original intent, financing it with the largest Medicare cut in history. Democrats rewrote the SCHIP bill at 3:10 a.m. on Wednesday, Aug. 1 and passed it at 7:35 p.m. that evening, preventing any opportunity for hearings on the re-written bill or a thorough reading of it by Members, the press or the public. This violated Speaker Pelosi’s promise that “Members should have at least 24 hours to examine bill and conference report text prior to its consideration. Rules governing floor debate must be reported before 10 p.m. for a bill to be considered the following day.” (A New Direction For America, Page 24).
In addition, during the middle-of-the-night rewrite, Democrats added more than two dozen anonymous hospital earmarks benefiting almost exclusively senior Democrats. This violates House rules requiring disclosure of earmarks and the Members that sponsor them (Rule XXI, clause 9).
- “Despite Ms. Pelosi's pledge that ‘we would have the most honest and open government,’ the new majority quickly adopted a whatever-it-takes approach to passing legislation. Last week alone, a dubious ethics bill was passed less than 24 hours after being introduced. The bill expanding health-care coverage to children was rewritten at 1 a.m., a rule harshly limiting debate was passed at 3 a.m., and the bill was sent to the floor for a final vote the same day.” (Opinion Journal, 8/6/07)
- “Bill Benefits Hospitals in Democrats’ Districts. More than two dozen hospitals across the country, most of them in Democratic congressional districts, would see their revenue boosted under a health insurance bill the House passed Wednesday … All but one of the hospitals are located in districts represented by Democrats… Many of the districts are represented by senior members of the Energy and Commerce Committee and the Ways and Means Committees…” (CQ Today, 8/1/07)
Rep. Hoyer Makes Good On His Threat. Wednesday night, by an 8-4 vote, the Rules Committee reported out a structured rule on the Agriculture spending bill, thereby voiding the bipartisan agreement (not to mention long-standing tradition) to debate Appropriations measures without restrictions on amendments and debate. It was when the bill returned to the floor the next night that the will of the American people would be overturned in an unprecedented violation of the rules and precedents of the House.
Thursday, August 2, 10:52 p.m.
Democrats steal the immigration vote, allow illegal immigrants to receive taxpayer-funded welfare benefits
Thursday evening, House Republicans offered a motion to recommit on the Agriculture spending bill that would protect taxpayers and deny taxpayer-funded welfare benefits for illegal immigrants. The scoreboard showing the vote total read “215-213” and “FINAL” when Rep. Michael McNulty (D-NY), acting as Speaker pro tempore, gaveled the vote to a close. Even though the Republican motion passed, Rep. McNulty announced the vote total as 214-214 and said it had failed. Afterward, Rep. McNulty would say he acted “prematurely.” In an unprecedented move, the vote was reopened, allowing enough Democrats to switch their votes so that the Republican motion failed again, this time by a 212-216 vote.
- “The House erupted into chaos late Thursday night when Democrats ruled that a roll call had failed even though, when the gavel fell, 215 members had voted for a Republican motion and 213 had voted against it … almost as soon as the gavel came down, the scoreboard registered … 215-213. The scoreboard showed those numbers and the word ‘FINAL.’ Within a minute or so, a flurry of post-gavel vote switches by Reps. Zack Space of Ohio, Kirsten Gillibrand of New York and Jerry McNerney of California – resulted in a 212-216 outcome…” (CQ, 8/3/07)
- “…Alleged Stolen Vote …GOP lawmakers had marched out of the House chamber about 11 p.m. Thursday, shouting ‘shame, shame’ and saying that Democrats had ‘stolen’ a vote on a parliamentary motion to pull an agriculture spending bill off the floor until it incorporated an explicit denial of federal benefits to illegal immigrants.” (Washington Post, 8/4/07)
Thursday, August 2, 10:54 p.m.
Democrat Majority Leader bullies non-partisan Parliamentarian into doing Democrats’ bidding
In the middle of the chaos caused by the Democrats’ successful attempt to steal the immigration vote away from Republicans, Majority Leader Hoyer charged up the House rostrum to the House Parliamentarian and, screaming so loudly microphones several feet away picked it up, claimed, “We control this House, not the parliamentarians!” Click here to watch Rep. Hoyer strong-arm the Parliamentarian. After such unprecedented bullying from the House Majority Leader on Thursday evening, it is no wonder Democrats were able to completely ignore and then bypass the proper rules of debate later in the week.
- Who is the Parliamentarian? According to the House Clerk’s website, “The Parliamentarian of the House is the authoritative source on legislative proceeding in the House of Representatives. Often referred to by the press as Congress' ‘coach,’ the Parliamentarian is an appointed officer who serves as a nonpartisan adviser to Members. Positioned next to the Speaker's rostrum on the floor, the Parliamentarian's chief duty is to rule on procedure and to advise the presiding officer.”
Friday, August 3, 9:05 a.m.
Rep. Murtha abuses the power of the Chair to cover up the stolen immigration vote
On Friday morning, Rep. John Murtha (D-PA), serving as the presiding officer, announced he had approved the Journal of the previous day’s controversial proceedings, including the stolen immigration vote. Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner (R-WI) demanded a vote of the House to approve the Journal. The video of the voice vote shows the “NOs” prevailed overwhelmingly, but Rep. Murtha ruled: “In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it.”
Recognizing Rep. Murtha’s misuse of the power of the chair, Majority Leader Hoyer immediately took to the floor and asked for a recorded vote that would nullify the voice vote and cover up Rep. Murtha’s behavior. Rep. Murtha asked for the requisite number of Members to stand to authorize the recorded vote, and, even though the chamber was virtually empty, he ruled that “a sufficient number having arisen,” the vote would be taken.
Rep. Sensenbrenner asked the Chair, “how many Members rose to request the recorded vote and the total number of Members present in the House upon which the chair made his decision?” Rep. Murtha, taking a partisan tone unbecoming of the non-partisan role of the chair, replied, “It’s up to the chair. And let me tell you this, the vote will show that the approval would be approved by the House, as it has been.”
Friday, August 3, 7:00 p.m.
Democrats forced to agree to Watergate-style commission to investigate stolen vote
Just before 7 p.m. on Friday, Leader Boehner offered a privileged resolution (H. Res. 611) to protest the Democrats’ actions and form a bipartisan commission to investigate. Privileged resolutions (or “questions of privilege”) are rare motions offered to protest violations of the House rules. They are typically dismissed by the majority party using a parliamentary tactic called a “motion to table.” The vote on the motion to table, almost always along party lines, kills the privileged resolution before the House as a chance to debate it. Rep. Hoyer could not afford to force his party – particularly all the Democrat freshmen who campaigned to “drain the swamp” – to vote to kill an investigation into the stolen vote, so he moved to approve the bipartisan commission by voice vote.
- “The House last night unanimously agreed to create a special select committee, with subpoena powers, to investigate Republican allegations that Democratic leaders had stolen a victory from the House GOP on a parliamentary vote late Thursday night … The agreement to form a special committee was extraordinary. Such powerful investigative committees are usually reserved for issues such as the Watergate scandal...” (Washington Post, 8/4/07)
In a colloquy with Leader Boehner, Rep. Hoyer explicitly rejected the opportunity to table the resolution, saying “I wanted, as I said, to try to make this right … we will not move, therefore, to table.”
Once again, Rep. Hoyer’s conciliatory tone and openness did not last long.
Friday, August 3, 9:02 p.m.
Democrats break House rules and cut off debate to cover up Rep. Murtha’s improper behavior
Republican Leader John Boehner rose Friday evening to offer a second privileged resolution (H. Res. 612), this time on Rep. Murtha’s aforementioned abuse of the power of the chair. The resolution said that Rep. Murtha “brought dishonor and discredit to the United States House of Representatives by misusing the powers of the chair.” Privileged resolutions must meet strict parliamentary criteria to qualify for consideration under the rules – a judgment made by the presiding officer immediately after the measure is read into the record.
After the House clerk finished reading the resolution, Majority Leader Hoyer was recognized by the chair at the time, Rep. Ellen Tauscher (D-CA). Upon recognition, the Majority Leader said, “Madam Speaker, enough is enough.” During the ensuing uproar, Rep. Hoyer then moved to table the resolution.
Rep. Hoyer’s motion is out of order under the rules because he engaged in debate before offering the motion. According to the “Guide to the Rules, Precedents and Procedures of the House” posted on the Rules Committee website, “a motion to table a proposition is in order after the proposition is called up for consideration but before debate thereon.”
After Rep. Hoyer’s remarks rendered a motion to table out of order, the rules required the House to proceed to debate on Leader Boehner’s privileged resolution. Although Leader Boehner repeatedly and vehemently raised parliamentary inquiries to that effect and was ignored, Rep. Tauscher eventually declared that she had not yet ruled his resolution a question of privilege. Without addressing the question of whether Rep. Hoyer engaged in debate, and without ruling whether Leader Boehner’s resolution qualified under the rules as a privileged resolution, she swiftly moved on to the vote to table the privileged resolution, which passed 211-178. (Vote #822, 8/3/07)
- “Republicans expressed outrage that Majority Leader Steny H. Hoyer’s motion to table that second resolution was allowed to be voted on without debate on the resolution, even though Hoyer, D-Md., said ‘Enough is enough’ before moving to table the resolution, which Republicans argue constituted the beginning of what should have been an hour of debate on the resolution.” (CQ Today, 8/5/07)
Welcome to GOP.gov | My GOP.gov | 
