Check out this website I found at nytimes.com
By JENNIFER STEINHAUER Published: February 18, 2011 RECOMMEND TWITTER E-MAIL PRINT REPRINTS SHARE WASHINGTON — It was billed as a battle over numbers, but the marathon floor fight in the House this week was more a drama over core political beliefs, with long-simmering resentments, partisan grandstanding and startling personal revelations sprinkled throughout the script. Enlarge This Image Harry Hamburg/Associated Press Representative Barney Frank called the battle an “orgy of self-congratulation.” Multimedia Interactive Graphic Key Budget Amendment Tracker Related House Set to Approve Cuts; Time Short to Stop Shutdown (February 19, 2011) Fervent G.O.P. Freshmen Ignite Budget Fight (February 18, 2011) Planned Parenthood Financing Is Caught in Budget Feud (February 18, 2011) Blogs The Caucus The latest on President Obama, the new Congress and other news from Washington and around the nation. Join the discussion. FiveThirtyEight: Nate Silver's Political Calculus More Politics News In the witching hours on Thursday night, Representative Barney Frank, Democrat of Massachusetts, denounced the fight over a short-term spending measure as an “orgy of self-congratulation,” and threatened to lengthen the already endless debate over the hundreds of amendments if he was not permitted to speak his mind about how much he hated the process. That same night, Representative Jackie Speier, her eyes narrowed and voice choked with rage, revealed on the House floor that she once had an abortion. For three riveting minutes, Ms. Speier, Democrat of California, denounced an amendment — that later passed — to take away federal financing from Planned Parenthood. “I’m one of those women” who had an abortion, she said, adding that it was because of a medical emergency. “For you to stand on this floor and suggest as you have that somehow this is a procedure that is either welcome or done cavalierly or done without any thought is preposterous.” There was a smattering of applause. On Friday, moments after Representative Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Democrat of Florida, suggested that the term “Obamacare” be excised from the House floor because that term disparages the president, Representative Steve King, Republican of Iowa, used the term repeatedly. For hour after painstaking hour, Republicans presented their vision for America through a series of amendments designed to cut spending in Washington. There were proposals to curb environmental regulations, withdraw financing for space exploration, end the practice of rounding up wild horses, prohibit assistance to countries that oppose the United States in the United Nations, prevent members of Congress from naming programs after themselves and to cut money for the study of Asian carp. Virtually no aspect of American life, from farms to the Internet to sexuality to education, was left untouched. While Democrats spoke angrily in defense of programs, Republicans, like Representative Paul Broun of Georgia, who suggested that payments to the United Nations were akin to money tossed into “ratholes,” hit back in the name of fiscal austerity. But some Democrats took advantage of Speaker John A. Boehner’s willingness to allow almost all comers to offer amendments (a big shift in policy from the tight control of floor proceedings practiced by the Democrats when Nancy Pelosi was speaker). There was an effort to deny the Defense Department the right to sponsor Nascar (failed), and the withdrawal of financing for a peace-oriented policy institute (passed). While most of the amendments were permitted 10 minutes of debate, others were given 20 minutes or more, depending on the topic. It was, said member after member, a battle over ideas and principals, of a vision for that the nation will be. Representative Edward J. Markey, Democrat of Massachusetts, summed up his view of it thusly: “Are we going to stand with big oil, or with Big Bird?” — an allusion to proposed cuts to public broadcasting. While Mr. Frank denounced the lengthy process that left members in the chamber into the wee hours, Republicans welcomed the spirited exchanges. Representative Louie Gohmert, Republican of Texas, was blistering in his response to Mr. Frank’s critique. “To sit here and listen, after having spent four years in the most closed Congress and then to be lectured” was, Mr. Gohmert concluded, “the real travesty.” Tones were angry and voices were raised, and legislators were reminded at times not to address each other directly, per the rules. But members also used their Congressional inside voices, as when Representative Lee Terry and Representative Norm Dicks clashed briefly over whose turn it was to discuss net neutrality. Mr. Dicks, Democrat of Washington, was convinced that Mr. Terry, Republican of Nebraska, had already spoken, and Mr. Terry, in protest, said: “Yield to me please. Give me a little bit of respect.” Mr. Dicks replied, “I yield to the gentleman,” then conceded: “You’re such a handsome guy, I thought you spoke twice. I’m sorry.” In the middle of it all on Friday, members stopped their fighting to give an acclamation to Representative Jane Harman, Democrat of California, who is retiring. This is what is known on the Hill as professional courtesy. It also takes a lot of time. 
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment