Election 2016: Keith Ellison: ‘I would love to see Elizabeth Warren’ run
More piling on. I love it. Snippets:
THE NEW Democratic House majority has an ambitious plan for its first 100 hours in power, from increasing the minimum wage to strengthening ethics rules to having the federal government negotiate prescription drug prices. Unfortunately, its plans don’t include getting those provisions passed in the democratic fashion that the Democrats promised to adhere to once in the majority. When Republicans took over in 1995, they at least went through the motions of putting their “Contract With America” proposals through the normal committee process. Democrats under Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) have decided not to bother with that, nor to let Republicans offer amendments on the floor, nor even to put a GOP alternative up for a vote. This is exactly the kind of high-handed mistreatment that Democrats complained about, justifiably, when they were in the minority.
Democrats offer various rationales for their about-face. They say the streamlined process is necessary because they’ve pledged to accomplish so much in their first 100 legislative hours. But what makes living up to that self-imposed deadline — which will stretch on for weeks, in any event — more important than living up to their promise of procedural fairness? And why, even if that deadline is sacrosanct, couldn’t Republicans at least be offered an opportunity to offer alternatives on the floor?