Retiring Indiana Rep. Steve Buyer uncovered Democratic tactics in trying to get a bill passed that had not gone through committee and called them on it. Monday, the acting Speaker of the House, Laura Richardson (D-California) used every trick in the book to quash his remarks.
Eventually, Richardson changed her mind and granted Buyer a minute to speak, which brought the congressman back to the lectern to ask, “was treating another member with dignity so hard, madam speaker? I don’t believe it was.”
He then expressed his dissatisfaction with the procedure of a veterans bill, which he claimed was being brought to the floor by the rules of suspension, or as he put it, an “abuse of the process” and “political treachery.” [Huff Post]
Posted in: CONGRESS
ON MY WATCH - the writings of SamHenry 
carldagostino
December 1, 2010
This one sent me right to the research button. Apparently application of the “rules of suspension” are legitimate and used quite frequently. Usually for non controversial procedural matters that both parties support. It’s a time saver thing if used that way. The committee chair need not be present to make the motion as Buyer suggested and the speaker may suspend the rules. It takes a 2/3 vote of those present to suspend the rules. I could not find out if the 2/3 vote is needed if the speaker suspends the rules. So this would not be an “abuse of power” as Buyer suggested when he called her out. If “suspension of the rules” is used to circumvent debate initiated by the party with majority it may be a distasteful application of power by that side but not an illegal abuse. These circumvention and delay tactics go on all the time. I suppose it is part of the internal checks and balances of the congress as the Founding Fathers wanted to insure that legislation was not passed by slim margins but that an overwhelming majority approval was a way to make sure only “good stuff” got passed to protect the people. Presidents can circumvent nominee confirmation but appointing while congress out of session(but they can serve without confirmation until end of next session). Clinton did that 139 times and Bush did it 171 times. The congress can derail the confirmation process with delays which sometimes makes the president withdraw nominations. Beyond constitutionality certainly Buyer was disrespected. He cannot stop this legal process but he should have been allowed to voice his displeasure at it’s application. Certainly the action disregarded the collegiality that should exist between house members. And although the speaker may refuse to recognize it was discourteous not to recognize as there was no objection. In addition, not to recognize a retiring congressman in the closing days of his service is an insult.
samhenry
December 1, 2010
I so appreciate the researchon the “rules of suspension.” It is a marvelous and needed addition to this post. Buyer is certainly not without controversy himself. His main objection to the use of the tactic is that the bill did not go through committee – that procedures in place were not followed.
While these kinds of tactics are legal and all have used them at some point, still, the Democrats between 2008 and 2010 were known for perfecting and over use of such tactics. They created an atmosphere of mistrust and anger that will take years to overcome.