The rules say what we want them to say
|
Does anybody else see a comparison between the DFL-controlled Minnesota Legislature’s decision not to send its bonding bill to Gov. Tim Pawlenty and the Democrat-controlled Congress’ delays in passing health care reform in Washington D.C.?House Speaker Margaret Anderson Kelliher, DFL-Minneapolis, announced Tuesday that even though both houses passed a final bonding bill, legislative rules allowed them not to send it to Pawlenty, who has said he’ll veto it on arrival.Kelliher said they need a “cooling off period” with Pawlenty to figure out what he wants put in the bill and what he wants taken out of it. Pawlenty, for his part, said Tuesday he had already made that clear in his bonding request to the Legislature.The bonding bill faces a certain Pawlenty veto, but that could be overridden with a couple Republican votes in the House, while in D.C. it’s the Senate where Democrats need to pick up a few votes to pass the health care reform they want.But in both cases, it seems that Democrats are willing to throw up their hands and say “well, we tried” without actually, you know, getting something done.In Washington D.C., Democrats have the parliamentary option of passing a weak Senate health care bill and then pushing through stronger reforms such as the “public option” by shoving parliamentary procedure through a meat-grinder known as the reconciliation process.That process would allow them to pass budget-related legislation by a simple majority instead of needing 60 votes to end debate and avoid threats of a filibuster. More than 20 Democratic U.S. Senators have signed a letter in support of this procedural path, including U.S. Sen. Al Franken, D-Minn. U.S. Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., has said she supports it too, but hasn’t signed the letter yet.In St. Paul, DFLers have no easy way around a Pawlenty veto except to find the votes to override him. Continue Reading








