December 18, 2009
Exclusive: Is Rule of Law Dead in the Senate?
Scott McKay
Redstate.com’s Erick Erickson describes a rather shocking scenario which took place on the Senate floor on Wednesday, after Tom Coburn (R-OK) had objected to a unanimous consent request to dispense with the reading of socialist Bernie Sanders’ 767-page “single-payer” amendment to the health care bill and had the Senate clerk commence reading it…
For over 200 years, the Senate’s rules have ensured orderly and very fair debate. The minority has rights that the majority has never and would never trod upon. One of the chief rules of the Senate is that when one Senator has the floor, no other Senator may act.
Tom Coburn had the floor. He made the clerk read the amendment. Somehow, however, Senator Sanders was able to have his amendment yanks mid-reading.
Under Senate rules, that is flat out impossible.
Erickson then quotes from Senate rules as described by Riddick’s Senate Procedure…
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.
According to the American Spectator, this breach of the Senate rules hasn’t gone unnoticed. “In allowing Sanders to do that, it appears the parliamentarian has broken the standing rules of the Senate,” a Senate aide e-mails. “We’re looking into the implications of this and working on where to go from here.”
This isn’t the first time the parliamentarian has allowed such a breach, as something similar happened in 1992. But Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell took to the floor yesterday and explained why that’s no excuse…
But one mistake does not a precedent make. For example, there is precedent for a Senator being beaten with a cane here in the Senate. If mistakes were the rule, the caning of Senators would be in order. Fortunately for all of us, it is not,” he said, adding: “It’s now clear the majority is willing to do anything to jam through a 2000-page bill before the American people or any of us has had a chance to read it — including changing the rules in the middle of the game.
Frankly, caning doesn’t sound like all that awful an idea. The depths to which the leadership in the Senate is willing to go in pursuit of politically-suicidal legislation are astounding, but we haven’t seen the beginning of the real fireworks yet. What is being debated now is a “vapor bill,” a sideshow which matters not at all. The real bill will come in the form of a “manager’s amendment” submitted at the last minute – as in, the minute there are 60 votes for whatever permutation of giveaways, bribes and policy tweaks can be combined for passage.
After what happened with the Sanders amendment Wednesday, it’s even money or better that the leadership will circumvent the Senate rules again. Remember, all of this is only going to happen when it’s thought that there are 60 votes for cloture.
With the Senate rules now tied up and locked in a closet, it may be that the American people are the only thing standing between this horrid bill and the president’s signature.
Reader Comments: Submit Your Comment (2)
Under the leadership (?) of our Senator Reid, the liberals have done it again, and are happy about it. You see, any means to an end! But, how loud will they scream when, in the future, the other side does the same to them? Oh wait, what is before us now is what's important. Let the future take care of itself. Can you spell "TERM LIMITS"?
posted by : Bill Wilderman
Friday, December 18, 2009 at 12:11 AM
Senator Cardin,D-MD, was in sitting in place of Reid at that moment, and he is the one who allowed Sanders to pull the bill. As a Maryland resident I spoke several times with Cardin's office immediately after that happened. His office had several variations of excuses. To a friend of mine they told that Cardin had unanimous consent, which he obviously did not. To me, they told that Sanders talked with the Parlimentarian, then that Cardin talked with the Parlimentarian. There is no verbal recording of any break in the conversation where Cardin would have spoken with the Parlimentarian. There is nothing in the Congressional Record that indicates anyone spoke with the Parlimentarian. Reading the rules and the precedent for this type of thing indicates that it would not be allowed by the Parlimentarian. My conclusion is that it was not the Parlimentarian who allowed this, but that it was Cardin himself that decided to allow it to be pulled without consulting the Parlimentarian. Speaking with Cardin's office did nothing to change that conclusion since they gave three different answers that I myself am aware of. It is just an attempt to deflect responsibility from Cardin onto someone else. Typical.
posted by : KF
Sunday, December 20, 2009 at 02:09 AM
