RPV Fails Again

Yesterday the Republican Party of Virginia issued a press release and video surrounding the "controversy" when Senate Democrats decided to kill some right wing bills in subcommittee this week and not allow a full committee vote.

Following that press release, right wing bloggers began piling on and on and on and on and on. 

First of all, there was no "rule breaking" as RPV alleged.  In fact- guess where the rule that was used to not hear these bills came from?

Got your guess ready?

It was the Republicans!  GOP Senate Leader Tommy Norment stood up and requested... no he implored Senate Democrats to add this rule to allow the Senate to kill bills in subcommittee to speed up the legislative process.

Check out this video of Norment on the floor requesting this rule change.  RPV, you are pathetic.  Every blogger who called for Senator Janet Howell to resign owes her an apology.

 

 

Comments

[Max Shapiro]

What date did Norment give the speech and did they ever actually formally adopt the rule or is it just the chair's privilege either way?

Great post, thanks for the info!

[Not Larry Sabato]

They adopted the rule after he spoke last year, it's been in effect this entire session.

[Brian W. Schoeneman]

I'm fine with asking those bloggers for an apology - just as soon as Chap apologizes to Speaker Howell, Delegate LeMunyon and Senator Obenshain for calling the repeal amendment "secession."

[Not Larry Sabato]

Brian, I think it's pretty cowardly that you post comments on here and on your blog about Chap when he has a blog and responds to almost every productive comment personally. Why not go there and complain if you have a problem with what he wrote?

[Rtwng Extrmst]

Plus you misspelled his name. It's not "Chap" it's "Chap!"

[Not Larry Sabato]

Yeah Brian, get with it. I mean "it!"

[Brian W. Schoeneman]

I don't think I could have fit my whole post into his comments. Besides, I know Chap reads your blog and my blog, so what's the difference?

[Brian W. Schoeneman]

That's true. I totally forgot to put in the exclamation point. Anyway, I went over to Chap!s site and posted a comment.

Don't I get credit for not running with this story?

[Bubby Hussein, Hillbilly Sheikh]

Here's your lead Brian:
"While Governor McDonnell Proposes Billions in Borrowing, Republican Legislators Revisit Secession."

[Helen]

Bubby - secession. Is the bill you are referring to the Constitutional Amendment w/2/3 of the states agreeing or not to a mandate from DC?

Just asking. Need clarification. thx

[Bubby Hussein, Hillbilly Sheikh]

Hi Helen, yes. SJ 280.

[Not Larry Sabato]

Brian, credit duly given!

[BM]

Hey, is that Fred Quale next to Norment...or Boss Hogg?

[Gretchen Laskas]

Great catch, Ben!

[Mr Bubbles]

Ben, clearly you are not aware of the passage in the bible were jesus says that republicans should not be held responsible for their words or actions.

[William Jackson]

OR - the same bloggers could call for Tommy Norment to resign...

[Not Marcos]

Best, blog, ever.

[not a virginia state senator]

good job Ben...

[Wing Nut]

Show me where the Senate Rules have changed. Norment suggested a change, but if the Rules have not changed accordingly, the action of the Senate majority is wrong.

Moreover, why is it out of order under the Senate Rules to move bills be added to a committee docket?At the very least, a vote should be taken on that simple motion.

[Not the Senate Parliamentarian]

The committe chair has always had the power to decide whether a bill be added to the docket or not.

In this case, the chair decided not to hear the bill.

[Cheap Chanel Purses]

Try your best not to tout your own please, but if you feel strongly that your agency is the iBee's iKnees, then go for it. Hopefully the CMO in my conversation (together with any others out there) will benefit from this post and use it as a catalyst or conduit towards their next exploratory conversation or RFP process.

[Average Voterf]

This is neat inside baseball stuff. Truly fun. Seriously though, I can't think of any regular voters I know who care one bit about arcane parliamentary process.

[Helen]

Ah, Average Voterf, it is these "arcane" rules that ensures sunlight doesn't prevail.

Afterall, the average voter may be being intentionally dumbed down through such "arcane" processes b/c what they don't know won't hurt the incumbent at the ballot box.

[Stewart]

Brian, what else would you call a resolution that attempts to rewrite the constitution over anger at the health care law? The people elected the president and the congress, and they passed a bill. Next subject, please.

[Brian W. Schoeneman]

I would call it a constitutional amendment, designed to provide state input into the federal legislative process, as the founders intended when they set up the Senate in its original form.

It's a bad idea. It's not nullification.

[Valley Indie]

Killing a bill the way Howell has attempted to do is cowardly and anti-democratic. No matter which party does it. Voters hate this stuff and would prefer to see our legislators actually get something done.

Have the courage to vote on it. Is that so hard?

[change]

I agree that committee chairs have vast powers and the house and senate should play by the same rules. I see nothing wrong in what Howell did. However, aren’t these rules written down someplace so that everyone knows how the game is played?

The “because I said so” (which I don’t think she really said) argument; reminds me of the continuing debate over how we know Obama is a natural born citizen.
People don’t accept these types of answers, they require documentation (which is probably a good thing for those seeking facts).

Wouldn’t it be simple just to produce the rulebook for the senate and house so that everyone can move on?; I must admit it does make for great political theater, but little else.

[NotJohnSMosby]

Valley,

If the whole Senate voted on every single thing that came up in all of the different committees, they would be in session until May every year.

Brian, the states do have input into the US Senate - notice the statewide elections for Senators? That's about as much input as you need, actual citizens voting directly for the people who will represent their state. Not whoever the state legislature - a different level of government - decides who will be Senator for the next few years.

[Stewart]

...and again with the 17th Amendment canard. Like the same lobbyists and special interests wouldn't be in Richmond instead of DC if the General Assembly went back to picking Senators.

Bill Howell and Kirk Cox picking our Senators, or voters? Easy choice.

[change]

Valley,
You might disagree with what she did, but it was far from “cowardly”.

[change]

Stew,
Those “lobbyists and interest groups” would have a much more difficult time attempting to sell their wares in 50 states (or 57 according to Obama) with thousands of individual elections; than they do in only 100 elections in varying years.

If the original goal of the constitution were adhered to the Senate would not be so much of an “elitist” group, and more representative of the populace. Isn’t that closer to true democracy, or at least a representative republic?

[GretchenLaskas]

"Wouldn’t it be simple just to produce the rulebook for the senate and house so that everyone can move on?; I must admit it does make for great political theater, but little else. "

That would actually require some common sense!!!

[Brian W. Schoeneman]

NJSM, the states as states do not. The individuals of the states do - but they already did, which was the point of the House of Representatives.

I'm not arguing in favor of repealing the 17th amendment, nor am I arguing in favor of the repeal amendment. I am simply pointing out that calling it nullification is as inaccurate as it is inappropriate.

[Stewart]

Trust me, change, it is really not hard to get a team of lobbyists make the House of Delegates vote for something.

[Generic Viagra]

Your work is fantastic an inspiration to others.