Dems vow rules overhaul to empower members if House flips

[Mach]

That's one of my top concerns for the next two elections (mid-terms and presidential).

Fixing our absurdly broken rules that allowed the GOP to bend the nation over, because well...because honey badger don't care.
And this is obviously going to affect everyone, and Dems are no stranger to dabbling in bad acting too. I have no idea if the specific here are good, go far enough, or go too far, but I'm keenly interested to see this sort of thing get attention in the coming months and years. This is a bi-partisan list from the Problem Solvers Caucus and others I believe.

Should they take back the House in November, Democrats are vowing not only a shift in legislative priorities and much stronger White House oversight, but also rules changes on how the chamber is run.
House GOP leaders this year hit a dubious milestone when they broke the single-cycle record for reporting closed rules — the procedural step barring lawmakers from amending bills when they hit the floor.

In the eyes of Democrats, and a growing number of Republicans, the distinction highlights a disturbing creep towards top-down legislating that’s stifled debate, paralyzed rank-and-file members and thwarted the “more inclusive” process Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) promised when he took the gavel three years ago.

Examples (it appears to be a work in progress so this could be from other sources, it's all in the same article)
95 closed rules for the GOP...a record...

1. 3/5 house super-majority required to pass legislation brought under closed rule (limiting transparency/debate costs more)

2. 2/3 house co-sponsor to ensure fast-track consideration (limiting transparency/debate cost more)

3. 1/3 of House has to publicly support removing a sitting Speaker (reduces chance of holding speaker hostage/paralyzed, aka Ryan

4. congress members can't sit on corporate boards (Chris Collins insider trading)

“I’m not here to say that when Democrats were in control, they ran everything perfectly,” he said. “Part of what we’re trying to do is make sure that more members are part of the process.”“We would make a terrible mistake if we mimic their behavior,” he said.

Why do Democrats have to be the ones to fix the leaks and do the right thing? Well, if it's bi-partisan, I suppose we'll be able to include the non-Trump/freedom Caucus types in that more positive characterization?

 

[apdst]

That's one of my top concerns for the next two elections (mid-terms and presidential).

Fixing our absurdly broken rules that allowed the GOP to bend the nation over, because well...because honey badger don't care.
And this is obviously going to affect everyone, and Dems are no stranger to dabbling in bad acting too. I have no idea if the specific here are good, go far enough, or go too far, but I'm keenly interested to see this sort of thing get attention in the coming months and years. This is a bi-partisan list from the Problem Solvers Caucus and others I believe.



Examples (it appears to be a work in progress so this could be from other sources, it's all in the same article)
95 closed rules for the GOP...a record...

1. 3/5 house super-majority required to pass legislation brought under closed rule (limiting transparency/debate costs more)

2. 2/3 house co-sponsor to ensure fast-track consideration (limiting transparency/debate cost more)

3. 1/3 of House has to publicly support removing a sitting Speaker (reduces chance of holding speaker hostage/paralyzed, aka Ryan

4. congress members can't sit on corporate boards (Chris Collins insider trading)



Why do Democrats have to be the ones to fix the leaks and do the right thing? Well, if it's bi-partisan, I suppose we'll be able to include the non-Trump/freedom Caucus types in that more positive characterization?

You don't really buy inti that. Do you?

 

[Captain Adverse]

That's one of my top concerns for the next two elections (mid-terms and presidential).

Fixing our absurdly broken rules that allowed the GOP to bend the nation over, because well...because honey badger don't care.
And this is obviously going to affect everyone, and Dems are no stranger to dabbling in bad acting too. I have no idea if the specific here are good, go far enough, or go too far, but I'm keenly interested to see this sort of thing get attention in the coming months and years. This is a bi-partisan list from the Problem Solvers Caucus and others I believe.



Examples (it appears to be a work in progress so this could be from other sources, it's all in the same article)
95 closed rules for the GOP...a record...

1. 3/5 house super-majority required to pass legislation brought under closed rule (limiting transparency/debate costs more)

2. 2/3 house co-sponsor to ensure fast-track consideration (limiting transparency/debate cost more)

3. 1/3 of House has to publicly support removing a sitting Speaker (reduces chance of holding speaker hostage/paralyzed, aka Ryan

4. congress members can't sit on corporate boards (Chris Collins insider trading)


Why do Democrats have to be the ones to fix the leaks and do the right thing? Well, if it's bi-partisan, I suppose we'll be able to include the non-Trump/freedom Caucus types in that more positive characterization?

You did point out that such "rules" work equally well for whichever Party is in the Majority for each session of Congress after elections, right?

So unless the "radical" Democratic-Socialists somehow take a dominant role in government and a majorly "left" turn occurs, I see this as mostly talk to get elected without much action following.

 

[Mach]

link!
http://thehill.com/homenews/house/403531-dems-vow-rules-overhaul-empower-members-if-house-flips
-
Blowback from people wanting Democrats to be as deplorable as the current Republican congress was also discussed in the article:

Democrats urging more legislative openness may face blowback from their liberal base, which is energized against President Trump and would look to a newly empowered Democratic majority to fight fiercely for a progressive agenda. Those voices may pressure party leaders to revert to Republican tactics for the sake of passing preferred policy items.

Gottheimer, however, dismissed those potential tensions, arguing that the elections will likely give voice to moderate voters — a group he calls “the silent middle” — eager for more cooperation on Capitol Hill.

“I don’t think anyone should kowtow to the extremes on either side,” he said.

McGovern echoed that message, saying Democrats can be successful without ramming legislation through the chamber.

“We would make a terrible mistake if we mimic their behavior,” he said.
“I have a lot things I want to see done in terms of policy initiatives, and I’m going to fight like hell, if we win, to see them enacted,” he added. “But victories on those issues are more legitimate if there’s a fair process.”