Subject: [big campaign] 34 Of 41 Senate Republicans Used Reconciliation To Pass Major Domestic Policy Legislation
From: Adam Jentleson <[email-masked]>
To: "[email-masked]'" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 9 Mar 2010 16:23:15 -0500
List-Id: <bigcampaign.googlegroups.com>

Full transcript of the video below. -Adam

34 Of 41 Senate Republicans Have Used Reconciliation To Pass Major Domestic Policy Legislation »<http://thinkprogress.org/2010/03/09/34-gop-reconciliation/>

http://thinkprogress.org/2010/03/09/34-gop-reconciliation/

As the outlook on passage of health reform improves, Republicans have shifted to a new obstructionist strategy: attacking the process of reconciliation<http://thinkprogress.org/2010/03/07/graham-reconciliation-bipartisan/>. Republicans claim that reconciliation was only intended to be used for bills dealing closely with the budget<http://wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/2010/03/02/orrin-hatch-reconciliation/>. In fact, when Republicans were in power, GOP lawmakers used reconciliation numerous times to pass major domestic policy legislation, including the Bush tax cuts in 2001<http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=107&session=1&vote=00170> and 2003<http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=108&session=1&vote=00196> and important changes to health care policy. In fact, 34 of the 41 Senate Republicans have used reconciliation in the past to pass major pieces of domestic policy.

In 2005, Sen. Judd Gregg (R-NH) famously defended reconciliation<http://yglesias.thinkprogress.org/archives/2010/02/judd-gregg-on-reconciliation.php> as "majority rules." Think Progress has compiled a video of some of these 34 senators who have, in the past, defended reconciliation and railed against the filibuster. Some highlights:

- "If you've got 51 votes for your position, you win." - Sen. Judd Gregg (R-NH), 3/15/05

- "For some time, I hoped that my colleagues who oppose reform would allow a majority in both bodies to prevail and do what the vast majority of the American public desires." - Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), 10/15/99

- "It [the filibuster] is the product of a rule of the Senate passed many years after the ratification of the Constitution. This rule does not derive from the authority of the Constitution." - Sen. Kit Bond (R-MO), 5/19/05

- "Filibusters are neither an idea of the founding fathers nor a historical tradition of the Senate." - Sen. James Inhofe (R-OK), 4/27/05

Watch it:

The full list of Senate Republicans who have used reconciliation to pass major domestic policy, as well as a list of those pieces of legislation can be found after the jump:

Major domestic policy legislation that these 34 Senators have voted for through reconciliation in the past 20 years: Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1989, Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990, Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993, Balanced Budget Act of 1995, Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996, Balanced Budget Act of 1997, Taxpayer Relief Act of 1997, Taxpayer Refund and Relief Act of 1999, Marriage Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2000, Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001, Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003, Deficit Reduction Act of 2005, Tax Increase Prevention and Reconciliation Act of 2005, College Cost Reduction and Access Act of 2007

VIDEO TRANSCRIPT:

Judd Gregg, 3/15/2005:
"All this rule of the Senate does is allow a majority of the Senate to take a position and pass a piece of legislation."

Kit Bond, 5/19/2005:
"The Constitution says nothing of the subject of a filibuster and nothing of the power of a minority to defeat the President's judicial nomination."

James Inhofe, 4/27/2005:
"Filibusters are neither an idea of the founding fathers nor a historical tradition of the Senate."

John McCain, 10/15/1999:
"For some time, I hoped that my colleagues who oppose reform would allow a majority in both bodies to prevail and do what the vast majority of the American public desires. But the opponents of reform, defenders of the status quo, won't cede their rights."

Kit Bond, 5/19/2005:
"It is the product of a rule of the Senate passed many years after the ratification of the Constitution. This rule does not derive from the authority of the Constitution."

Mike Enzi, 9/26/2006
"In July, this legislation received 55 votes on the Senate floor - a clear majority. Unfortunately, obstructionists used our arcane Senate rules to require 60 votes for passage to defeat consideration of the bill."

James Inhofe, 4/27/2005:
"The filibuster didn't even exist until the 1830s, when it was used to block legislation and not judicial picks."

Judd Gregg, 3/15/2005:
"Now is there something wrong with 'majority rules'? I don't think so."

James Inhofe, 4/27/2005:
"Cloture rules are a 20th century phenomenon, with the current rule less than 30 years old."

Judd Gregg, 3/15/2005:
"If you've got 51 votes for your position, you win."

-----
Adam Jentleson
Communications Director, Progressive Media
Center for American Progress Action Fund
[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>
ajentleson (AIM)
202-247-8614 (cell)

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the "big campaign" group.

To post to this group, send to [email-masked]

To unsubscribe, send email to [email-masked]

E-mail [email-masked] with questions or concerns
 
This is a list of individuals. It is not affiliated with any group or organization.