Republican leadership seems to realize they're shooting themselves in the foot with this 'unconstitutional' talk, since they've used this tactic many times before. You can't argue that the size or significance of the bill being passed makes it unconstitutional - that's a non sequitur. Apparently, Republicans have even defended use of this tactic in court - and won.
Cantor sheepishly smiled at Hoyer and ultimately agreed. “Yes, Steny is right. The rules of the House allow for this type of deeming provision, it’s called a self-executing provision which means that once the bill, the rule for the next bill passes, the Senate bill is automatically is deemed as having passed,” he said. As Norman Ornstein points out, “that strategy, then decried by the House Democrats who are now using it, and now being called unconstitutional by WSJ editorialists, was defended by House Republicans in court (and upheld). Dreier used it for a $40 billion deficit reduction package so that his fellow GOPers could avoid an embarrassing vote on immigration.”
Now, House Democrats are using it for two reasons. 1) They don’t want to vote for the Senate health care bill (which, as I argue here is a bit of a self-indulgence) and 2) Republicans won’t vote for cloture on the conference report.
Remember, if Republicans really believed that this rule is so unconstitutional — which Cantor actually backed away from asserting this morning — or that passing health care reform would undermine the Democratic party, then they would preserve our founding document and bolster their prospects in the midterm election by voting to “move forward.” After all, they vote for cloture on things they don’t like all the time (on March 10th Sen. Scott Brown voted against a bill extending health benefits after voting for cloture to allow the legislation to move forward a day earlier). Here, they’re choosing to continue obstructing reform and forcing the Democrats’ hand.
wonkroom.thinkprogress.org |
