| Now, in the Good Old Days, the opportunity to offer an amendment would have been no big deal. But the frequency with which substantial legislation (as opposed to post office renamings!) has been taken under closed rules under recent years (before and after the Dem takeover) means that the motion to recommit may be the only chance a minority has to amend the text as reported out.
A key element to agenda control is avoiding votes on matters whose passage will be embarrassing to the maj leadership, and which are, nevertheless, likely to pass.
The MoveOn thing is a classic example: the leadership would have known that loads of Dem reps would have wanted to give themselves cover by voting for a censure text. But, they would really rather not have seen the kind of inter-party conflict which passage of such censure was bound to result in.
The GOP, naturally, would be of the contrary mind!
The bill chosen was HR 2761, relating to the Terrorism Insurance Program. [Quite how it satisfied the germaneness requirement, I'm not sure! Even though the amendment proposed by a motion to recommit is special, it still has to comply with the rules relating to amendments, including the need to be germane.][See below]
Looking more generally at MTRs, my impression is that the GOP have been rather more successful in making use of the device in the 110th than the Dems were in the 109th and earlier Congresses.
One index would be the proportion of MTRs which passed. But one would need to filter for motherhood and apple pie texts whose passage would hardly be much to write home about.
Amendments like the MoveOn one are a different matter.
[Snafu above]
Less Homer nodding, more Rip van Winkle hibernating!
The measure to which the Betrayus MTR was attached was the FY08 continuing resolution H J Res 52.
(Silver lining: the MTR on HR 2671 was one of those promptly (cf forthwith) ones that result in a real remittal of the bill to the subject committee. Just like the Cantor MTR to the FISA bill HR 3773.) |
STATE BLOGS
