Wash. Post noted that GOP based “Minority Bill of Rights” on 2004 Pelosi plan, but not that GOP rejected it

Written by Josh Kalven

Published

In a January 3 article, The Washington Post reported that House Republicans were expected to introduce a “Minority Bill of Rights” modeled on a 2004 proposal by then-House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi (CA) to strengthen the committee and amendment process and ensure that all members of Congress have adequate time to review legislation. But the Post did not note that, as the paper had previously reported, the Republican leadership refused to consider Pelosi's proposal at the time.

In a December 29 letter, GOP Reps. Patrick McHenry (NC), Eric Cantor (VA), and Tom Price (GA) announced their intention to propose a “Minority Bill of Rights” they described as “identical -- in both letter and spirit -- to a 2004 proposal made by then-Minority Leader Pelosi.” Following are the terms:

  • Bills should only come to the floor after full hearings, open subcommittee and committee markup, and with members having a full 24 hours to review legislation prior to consideration at the subcommittee level.
  • Bills should normally be considered under a procedure that allows open, full, and fair debate consisting of a full amendment process that grants all members the right to offer amendments or substitutes.
  • Members should be allowed a full 24 hours to examine bills and conference reports before they come to the floor; and rules governing debate must be reported before 10:00 p.m. for a bill to be considered the next day.

In a January 3 “Washington in Brief” article, the Post devoted two paragraphs to the GOP's revival of the 2004 Democratic proposal:

Today, a group of GOP lawmakers is scheduled to propose a “Minority Bill of Rights,” based on Democratic language written in 2004, which would guarantee the minority the right to offer amendments or substitutes to bills, something the Democrats are not permitting in the first few weeks of the new Congress.

Democrats have said that all of the bills they are introducing in the first 100 hours of the new Congress are measures that lawmakers have previously vetted. Jennifer Crider, a spokeswoman for incoming House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), said that once the initial agenda is passed, “what Republicans will happily find is they will have a lot more participation and opportunities to offer their ideas than Democrats did.”

But absent from the Post article was any mention of the Republican leadership's immediate dismissal of Pelosi's 2004 proposal. Indeed, as the weblog TPM Muckraker noted, then-House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-IL) refused even to consider the Democratic proposal. From a June 24, 2004, Post article:

House Democrats' anger at heavy-handed Republican tactics reached a new level yesterday, with the chamber's top Democrat asking the House speaker to embrace a “Bill of Rights” for the minority, regardless which party it is.

In keeping with the general atmosphere of the House these days, aides to Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) said he will not respond to the two-page proposal from Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.).

For decades, the party in power has used House parliamentary rules to limit the minority party's ability to amend bills and shape debates. But Democrats -- in the minority for 10 years after four decades of control -- say Republicans have gone to unreasonable lengths in recent years. GOP leaders dispute this, but congressional scholars and even some rank-and-file Republicans agree in whole or in part.

By contrast to the Post, a January 2 article in The Hill reported on the GOP “Bill of Rights” and noted that “the Republican majority never considered Pelosi's legislation” in 2004:

Meanwhile, GOP Reps. Tom Price (Ga.), Eric Cantor (Va.), and Patrick McHenry (N.C.) plan to introduce a resolution next week modeled on legislation that Pelosi introduced in 2004.

Pelosi's “Minority Bill of Rights” demanded that legislation move through the committee process before reaching the House floor and urged GOP leaders to give lawmakers 24 hours to review legislation before it is considered and voted on by subcommittees or on the House floor.

McHenry expressed concern that excluding Republicans from the legislative process would set a bad precedent. GOP Reps. Buck McKeon (Calif.), Peter King (N.Y.) and Jim McCrery (La.) yesterday urged the Democrats who will chair their committees to conduct hearings on proposals that Democrats will consider in the first 100 legislative hours.

[...]

Democrats and political observers rejected the GOP proposal, noting that the Republican majority never considered Pelosi's legislation.

“I think they risk being laughed out of town,” said Rep. Louise Slaughter (D-N.Y.), the incoming chairwoman of the Rules Committee.

Norm Ornstein, a congressional scholar with the American Enterprise Institute, added, “I don't blame them in the slightest for picking it up and introducing it, but the chutzpah is quite remarkable.”