D.C. voting rights stall in House
This one is sort of fun to look at, for several reasons.
House Republicans derailed efforts yesterday to give the District congressional representation when they injected the city’s gun ban into the debate and turned an expected vote into a tumult.
Firstly, it’s always heartwarming to the Chief when the GOP jabs a finger in the eye of Queen Nancy’s supposed private fiefdom. Secondly, the Donk’s are ALSO discomfited over another topic – gun control. Finally, there’s an interesting political and historical parallel present that could be considered as indicative of a deep breach between the parties. Let the tears begin:
“They are into gamesmanship, and they have been successful with some of the games they are playing,” said Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton, a Democrat who is the District’s nonvoting congressional representative and a co-sponsor of the bill.
….but…but…but…according to the view of Pelosi et al, only the Donks are supposed to do stuff like this.
The measure was expected to pass in the Democratic-controlled Congress. However, Rep. Lamar Smith, Texas Republican, introduced a motion to add language to the bill to repeal much of the District’s gun ban. The ban was struck down by a federal appeals court earlier this month but remains in effect for now.
“My colleagues on the other side of the aisle have suggested today that District of Columbia citizens have the ‘right’ to a vote in Congress,” Mr. Smith said. “If that’s the case, then they must also agree that the citizens of the District should have the constitutionally guaranteed right to possess firearms and protect themselves.”
Dang! There’s pesky logic again! What’s a Donk to do?
Mr. Smith’s maneuver put conservative, pro-gun Democrats in the sticky situation of either voting for the motion, which would effectively kill the bill upon it being sent back to committee, or voting against the motion, which would have been perceived as being in favor of strict gun control.
…yet more weeping and wailing:
Rep. John Conyers Jr., Michigan Democrat, called Mr. Smith’s motion “the most startling hypocrisy I have ever heard of on a bill of this magnitude.”
Hey Donk Cong Conyers – learn what “hypocrisy” means: Espousing a set of values, and then acting contrary to them. Republicans might be expected to actually oppose what the Donks are trying to do here…so effectively acting to oppose the DOnks scarcely constitutes hypocrisy…although using that description DOES lend itself to the bloviating self-righteousness that Conyers is devoted to.
Another interesting provision of the bill is this:
The voting rights bill would grant the predominately Democratic District a seat in the House. In a bipartisan compromise, it also would create an additional at-large seat in the House for Utah, a state that leans Republican.
This sort of tit-for-tat vote Congressional vote swapping was characteristic of an earlier period in American history…when the opposing sides were also in a state of uncompromising mutual opposition: the pre-Civil War period of the slavery debates.
It’s also interesting that this situation did not occur in a vacuum – the GOP has apparently been carefully engineering this situation for some period of time:
GOP claims House victories in parliamentary power plays</strong>
This sort of thing is routine for the Senate, with its stricter limits to majority power…but the GOP has demonstrated that it works there too.
House Republicans are wielding the power of parliamentary procedure to score floor victories unlikely for a minority party. The Republicans have employed a tactic to alter a handful of bills in the Democratic-controlled chamber, and yesterday their patience paid off when they caught the new majority in a pickle and blocked a vote on D.C. voting rights. Republicans said it’s the culmination of a parliamentary strategy they’ve been plotting for weeks.
Read the rest of the article for the gory details.
