Why are the Democrats trying to evade responsibility by doing this.....?

Question

DEMOCRATS TO CHANGE 185 YEAR-OLD HOUSE RULE TO ALLOW TAX HIKES WITHOUT HAVING TO VOTE

May 16, 2007

In a stunning move, House Democrats today revealed they will attempt to rewrite House rules that have gone unchanged since 1822 in order to make it possible to increase taxes and government spending without having to vote and be held accountable. House Republican Leader John Boehner (R-OH) today vowed Republicans will use every available means to fight this unprecedented change.

“This is an astonishing attempt by the majority leadership to duck accountability for tax-and-spend policies the American people do not want,” Boehner said. “The majority leadership is gutting House rules that have been in place for 185 years so they can raise taxes and increase government spending without a vote. House Republicans will use every tool available to fight this abuse of power.”

Last November, House Democratic leaders promised the most open, ethical Congress in history:

“[W]e promised the American people that we would have the most honest and most open government and we will.” (Nancy Pelosi press stakeout, December 6, 2006)


“We intend to have a Rules Committee ... that gives opposition voices and alternative proposals the ability to be heard and considered on the floor of the House.” (Steny Hoyer in CongressDaily PM, December 5, 2006)


The rules House Democrats are seeking to change have not been changed since 1822.

Republicans have already achieved significant legislative successes on the House floor with 11 consecutive “motion-to-recommit” victories that exposed flaws and substantively improved weaknesses in underlying Democrat bills. But rather than living by the same rules which have guided the House of Representatives for 185 years, Democrats are proposing to change the rules in order to game the system and raise taxes and increase spending without a House vote. What are House Democrats afraid of?

Answer 1

Typical tax and spend democrats.

Then they bash bush for spending money on iraq but the liberals just want to give money to the non workers and lazy slobs.

Answer 2

Let's see. These are the same Republicans who were going to go for the Nuclear Option so they could confirm people into judgeships, thus getting around rules that had stood since the signing of the Constitution.

These are the same Republican who complain about tax-and-spend Democrats while running up a 9 trillion dollar debt. The only thing worse than a tax-and-spend Democrat is a 'Don't tax-and-spend-anyway' Republican.

And to have a Republican bringing the Democrats to heel on charges of ETHICS! That's so funny, I couldn't believe it.

Go back to watching Faux News. Maybe your head will explode and the gene pool will be better off.

Answer 3

The Democrats are just doing what they were taught by the Republicans. Three years ago it was the Dems yelling about the change of hundred year old Senate rules that allowed the Republicans to kill the filibusters of the Dems with the so called 'nuclear option'.

It was the Republicans that took the muzzles off the press to send attack dogs after President Clinton, with one accusation after another. Remember the tactic of guilt by accusation? But when it turned around and bit them with Delay, suddenly they were shocked, simply shocked to find out this was going on.

Why is it the Republicans always think it is just fine when they are trying to cheat, and horrible when they find out someone is returning the favor. What the Democrats are trying to do, if this is really going on, is wrong, but so was all the dirty tricks the Republicans used for years. Both sides are eyeball deep in slime.

Answer 4

"No motion or proposition on a subject different from that under consideration shall be admitted under color of amendment."
- Clause 7 of Rule XVI of the Rules of the House of Representatives

That's the rule the Dem's are proposing to change. It's A rule, not all the rules. Any legislation passed in the house would still require a vote so I don't know what the republicans are bitching about.

Answer 5

I'd also like to inform you that the Republicans weren't much better when they were in the majority.

They would give bills to the Democrats, bills that were a couple hundred pages long, only a couple hours before the voting so they wouldn't be able to get through everything to find a flaw before their vote had to be cast.

One of these bills given later than they should have been contained a part where they would be able to access ANYONE'S tax or bank records without their knowlege- thankfully, the Democrats caught that and didn't allow it to happen.

Not to mention, the Republicans would hold their conference committees, in which they would vote, in places unknown by the Democrats so that the Democrats wouldn't be able to cast their vote- if you're not at the meeting, you can't vote, so by not telling them where the meetings were held, they attempted to give themselves an advantage.

I'd also like to add the corruption added by these members of Congress...Republican ones:

Duke Cunningham- stole $2million.

Tom Delay- caught trying to rig Texas electoral system.

Bob Ney- traded votes on his conference committee for trips to Scotland. [( He told people he'd give them trips to Scotland if they voted in his favor )]

Jack Abramhoff- Told on Bob Ney, but was recruiting members of congress to vote on Indian casinos on Native American grounds by paying them for their vote.

When the Republicans were in Congress they worked a WHOPPING 93 days in two years!
Most Congresses work 250 days in two years.

Maybe if you'd do some research and be a little less biased, you'd realize that it's not JUST the party you're against that's corrupting our government.


And I'm neither Democratic or Republican, so don't say I'm defending them because they're my party- I'm defending them because you clearly don't have your facts straight, and you're cclearly not willing to look at the faults your party has.

Answer 6

I'll look into that meanwhile would you do us a favor and explain how we are going to pay off the trillion dollar debt we have. You know the one because the GOP would buy now and pay later? At least the Democrats believe in pay as you go. Let those who get benefit from the spending pay for it and not burden their great grandchildren with it.

Could we have your source? And it better not be Faux news.

Answer 7

Funny thing is, when the democrats lose the house again, they will cry about how unfair this law is. Just like how they complained that Bush shouldn't have the right to elect supreme court judges, despite not complaining when Clinton did. Its funny how power changes the party. Republicans used to be small government, and Democrats used to care about the will of the people... ohhh how power changes a party, they both suck.

Answer 8

Hilarious!! A Bushie talking about "ducking responsiblity". Oh, sweet irony.

I love that some of you are typing, "typical tax and spend dems..."
Okay, now what was the deficit like while Clinton was prez? And now that Duhbya is what it look like?
You want to cry, "Iraq war spending". Well that's another argument, but I'd say, "Well then what was the deficit like with Daddy Bush? Or Reagan?

Answer 9

This is a similar tactic to enacting pay raises for themselves by burying those appropriations in a totally unrelated bill. They know that certain legislation would fail if exposed to the light of day, so they hide it from the public. It's a way to avoid detection.

Answer 10

Hmm... maybe for the same reasons why George W. Bush issued far more signing statements (blatant violations of separation of powers) than any other President in history?

Answer 11

I think this is shady. If they want to raise taxes, which we know they do, be up front about it, and accept the responsibility if the tax increases fail to be used as good as possible. Why are they trying to hide it if they think it will be so good?