Tag: bills

failure of leadership

The search for a new Republican House speaker was long, fraught, and ugly – and resulted in the election of Mike Johnson of Louisiana who apparently does not have the mindset, skills, and experience to effectively govern.

Given that his own Republican conference is fractious and has only a slim majority, he should follow the lead of the Republicans in the Senate and work with the Democrats to craft legislation that can garner the votes of both a majority of Democrats and Republicans. Passing bills with only Republican support in the House isn’t going to do any good when they will not be taken up in the Senate and, even if they were, wouldn’t get the president’s signature. Legislation needs to be in line with the budget agreement already passed in the spring. Bills also need to be “clean,” meaning that they shouldn’t have unrelated amendments tacked on, such as federal abortion restrictions.

There are crucial pieces of legislation that need to pass soon. One is for funding for Israel and Ukraine, for border security, and for humanitarian and disaster relief, both at home and abroad. Another is a continuing resolution to keep the government funded until the final appropriations bills are adopted. The current resolution expires on November 17, so this needs to happen very soon to avoid a government shutdown. The Farm Bill, which covers a five-year period and is up for renewal now, needs to be enacted; besides framing bills, it also includes important nutrition programs. It would be nice if actual appropriations bills were passed – the Senate committees have passed these bills but the full Senate can’t vote on them until the House has acted – but an omnibus bill that folds all the budgetary bills together is also a possibility.

It’s possible that if Speaker Johnson does put bipartisan bills on the floor, a disgruntled House Republican will force a vote to vacate the chair, meaning to remove the Speaker, but the vote won’t succeed if the rest of the conference sticks together.

The Republicans have an opportunity to show that they are able to govern in a responsible way, fulfilling the promises made in the Preamble of our Constitution. Any member who instead chooses obstructionism should not be re-elected in 2024. We send our representatives to Washington to govern, not whine.

Photo credit: Photo by Lucas Sankey on Unsplash

Government Gridlock: Theme and Variations

Before the Nov. 4 US elections, there was a lot of speculation about whether or not the Republicans would take a majority of the Senate seats. I thought about weighing in, but didn’t because I realized it wouldn’t really matter. We would just be swapping one flavor of legislative gridlock for another.

A primer of the US system, for those who don’t live in the United States:  Legislation must be passed by the majority of both houses of Congress, The House of Representatives and the Senate. (If each houses passes a different version of a bill, a conference committee drafts a compromise version for approval.) The President can sign the legislation into law or veto it. In the case of a veto, the bill doesn’t become law unless a two-thirds majority of both houses of Congress vote to override the veto. The other important word to know is filibuster. In the Senate, 60 of 100 votes are needed to move a bill forward for a vote. This was originally designed as a way for minority views to be heard and was time-limited by the length of time that Senators could speak, but has morphed into a tool to block any legislation for which there are not 60 votes in favor, even if it has majority support of 51-59 votes.

Congress has been gridlocked for most of President Obama’s time in office. There was a brief period in the beginning of his presidency with a Democratic majority in the House and a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate. This was when the stimulus bill and the Affordable Care Act were passed.  The Republicans had vowed not to support anything the President wanted, but they could not stop legislation, so there was no gridlock then, even though the Republicans were refusing to co-operate in governing.

Within months, due to the death of Senator Kennedy and a special election that went to a Republican, the Democrats lost the ability to break a filibuster in the Senate and the first flavor of gridlock began. Instead of the rare use of the filibuster that had been the case for the 200+ year history of the Senate, the Republicans began filibustering almost every piece of legislation and many nominations for judgeships and executive branch appointees. The Democratic majority House was still passing bills, but the Democratic majority Senate could not get them to the floor because the 41 Republicans kept filibustering.

Next, the Republicans, thanks largely to gerrymandering of Congressional districts within states, took the majority in the House, which began phase two of gridlock, where the House passed dozens of bills that were never going to be taken up in the Senate, like voting to repeal the Affordable Care Act fifty times, while the Senate Republicans filibustered almost everything that was proposed. When there was a rare instance of bipartisanship, such as the Senate passage of comprehensive immigration reform, the Republicans in the House wouldn’t even bring it up for a vote. Meanwhile, the filibuster in the Senate blocked nominations for key posts, so we faced the ebola situation without a surgeon general to lead and co-ordinate the efforts and the debacle with Russia and Ukraine without a US ambassador to Russia.

So, with the electorate already frustrated with gridlock and disgusted that this Congress is about to break the shameful record set by the last Congress for least number of laws passed, we held elections last week. Turnout was 36.3% of eligible voters, the lowest in seventy-two years. In many Congressional districts, including mine, an incumbent was running unopposed. The Republicans will hold a majority in both houses of Congress.

One could hope that the Republicans would now decide to co-operate with the Democrats in governing, as many past Congresses have done when one party had majorities in Congress with a sitting president from the other party.

Unfortunately, such hope is not warranted.

We are just going to move on to the next flavor of gridlock, although this one will probably have a bit more spice to it. Some legislation that the Democrats find particularly objectionable will be filibustered in the Senate. Other legislation may pass by both houses on party-line votes, get vetoed by the president, and then die because there will not be a two-thirds majority to override the veto.

The mystery lies in what happens after that political theater is over. Will the Republicans, having satisfied their base with their initial votes, actually work to craft a bipartisan solution which could pass both houses and be signed by the president?

I wish I could say yes, but recent Republican party history and current rhetoric do not give cause for hope.