Slaughter House Rules: How Democrats may ‘deem’ ObamaCare into law, without voting

New York Democrat Louise Slaughter chairs the House Rules Committee

Wall Street Journal Opinion

Nancy Pelosi: “We have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it.” [Vote first, read later?]

The (Louise) Slaughter House Rule is a procedural ruse to let each House vote on a different version of a bill, resulting in some arbitrary hybrid, defeating one of Madison’s core checks and balances.

We’re not sure American schools teach civics any more, but once upon a time they taught that under the U.S. Constitution a bill had to pass both the House and Senate to become law. Until this week, that is, when Speaker Nancy Pelosi is moving to merely “deem” that the House has passed the Senate health-care bill and then send it to President Obama to sign anyway.

Under the “reconciliation” process that began yesterday afternoon, the House is supposed to approve the Senate’s Christmas Eve bill and then use “sidecar” amendments to fix the things it doesn’t like. Those amendments would then go to the Senate under rules that would let Democrats pass them while avoiding the ordinary 60-vote threshold for passing major legislation. This alone is an abuse of traditional Senate process.

But Mrs. Pelosi & Co. fear they lack the votes in the House to pass an identical Senate bill, even with the promise of these reconciliation fixes. House Members hate the thought of going on record voting for the Cornhusker kickback and other special-interest bribes that were added to get this mess through the Senate, as well as the new tax on high-cost insurance plans that Big Labor hates.

So at the Speaker’s command, New York Democrat Louise Slaughter, who chairs the House Rules Committee, may insert what’s known as a “self-executing rule,” also known as a “hereby rule.” Under this amazing procedural ruse, the House would then vote only once on the reconciliation corrections, but not on the underlying Senate bill. If those reconciliation corrections pass, the self-executing rule would say that the Senate bill is presumptively approved by the House—even without a formal up-or-down vote on the actual words of the Senate bill.

Democrats would thus send the Senate bill to President Obama for his signature even as they claimed to oppose the same Senate bill. They would be declaring themselves to be for and against the Senate bill in the same vote. Even John Kerry never went that far with his Iraq war machinations. As we went to press, the precise mechanics that Democrats will use remained unclear, though yesterday Mrs. Pelosi endorsed this “deem and pass” strategy in a meeting with left-wing bloggers.

This two-votes-in-one gambit is a brazen affront to the plain language of the Constitution, which is intended to require democratic accountability. Article 1, Section 7 of the Constitution says that in order for a “Bill” to “become a Law,” it “shall have passed the House of Representatives and the Senate.” This is why the House and Senate typically have a conference committee to work out differences in what each body passes. While sometimes one house cedes entirely to another, the expectation is that its Members must re-vote on the exact language of the other body’s bill.

As Stanford law professor Michael McConnell pointed out in these pages yesterday, “The Slaughter solution attempts to allow the House to pass the Senate bill, plus a bill amending it, with a single vote. The senators would then vote only on the amendatory bill. But this means that no single bill will have passed both houses in the same form.” If Congress can now decide that the House can vote for one bill and the Senate can vote for another, and the final result can be some arbitrary hybrid, then we have abandoned one of Madison’s core checks and balances.

Yes, self-executing rules have been used in the past, but as the Congressional Research Service put it in a 2006 paper, “Originally, this type of rule was used to expedite House action in disposing of Senate amendments to House-passed bills.” They’ve also been used for amendments such as to a 1998 bill that “would have permitted the CIA to offer employees an early-out retirement program”—but never before to elide a vote on the entire fundamental legislation.

We have entered a political wonderland, where the rules are whatever Democrats say they are. Mrs. Pelosi and the White House are resorting to these abuses because their bill is so unpopular that a majority even of their own party doesn’t want to vote for it. Fence-sitting Members are being threatened with primary challengers, a withdrawal of union support and of course ostracism. Michigan’s Bart Stupak is being pounded nightly by MSNBC for the high crime of refusing to vote for a bill that he believes will subsidize insurance for abortions.

Democrats are, literally, consuming their own majority for the sake of imposing new taxes, regulations and entitlements that the public has roundly rejected but that they believe will be the crowning achievement of the welfare state. They are also leaving behind a procedural bloody trail that will fuel public fury and make such a vast change of law seem illegitimate to millions of Americans.

The concoction has become so toxic that even Mrs. Pelosi isn’t bothering to defend the merits anymore, saying instead last week that “we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it.” Or rather, “deeming” to have passed it.

*COTO Report endorses a single payer, medicare-for-all healthcare plan, thus rejecting ObamaCare whether bipartisanly passed or not. We’re the only civilized nation on the planet that does not provide free healthcare for all its citizens. Given deregulation and the Wall Street bailouts, the elites are long past due on giving back to We the People.

5 responses to “Slaughter House Rules: How Democrats may ‘deem’ ObamaCare into law, without voting

  1. Pingback: The Progressive Mind » Slaughter House Rules: How Democrats may ‘deem’ ObamaCare into law, without voting « COTO Report

  2. If I remember correctly wasn’t the 2007 budget two separate bills that were never reconciled according to constitutional requirements? Everyone in Congress knew that the house and senate hadn’t agreed on exact wording and there was an unconstitutional budget bill signed by Bush but who was gonna argue with the GOP in getting its own way, right?

  3. sorry you gave up, too, John

    the fat cats have to give up these expensive wars and let us, the United States of America, care for ourselves with universal health care.

    medicare for all

    single payer; regionally (NOT Federally) run. info stays within regions –

    the health insurance industry must die

    good bye so sad to see so many of you lose your jobs… while you bled tens of millions of us

    good bye insurance workers… you work for a system that prefers profits over people’s lives.

    good bye … so sad to see you go.

    btw, the plan is we are making this happen and the federal government needs to gtf out of our way

  4. yeah, saw that. jeez

  5. well, looks like the GOP has pulled this slaughter solution:

    GOP House Used Dreaded So-Called ‘Slaughter Rule’ 202 Times under Speakers Gingrich and Hastert

    Jon Ponder | March 17, 2010

    Republicans are flailing away about procedural maneuvers involved in passing health care reform because polling shows that the public doesn’t have a clue how bills are passed and they hate seeing how legislative sausage gets made.

    Republicans also don’t care when their own rank hypocrisy is revealed in the “liberal media” — when there are balanced reports, for example, that they used the same arcane rules with wild abandon when they controlled Congress. The Republican base will never learn about their own pols’ hypocrisy because these voters have been trained to get their “news” exclusively from right-wing propaganda outlets like Fox News and hate radio, where untidy facts like these will never be mentioned.

    But independent voters, who are not averse to exposure to a variety of points of view, still control the outcomes in many congressional districts, so it is important to set the record straight.

    The GOP’s latest flog is the “self-executing rule,” also known as “deem and pass,” which they have cleverly branded the “Slaughter Rule” after Rep. Louise Slaughter, the New York Democrat who chairs the House Rules Committee.

    (Marc Ambinder has more about Republican lies about deem and pass — they’re also saying it means there won’t be a vote; there will — as well as explanation of how the rule works, at the Atlantic.)

    Here is a rundown of Republicans’ use of deem and pass when they controlled the House:


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s