Posted on 05/13/2003 4:11:35 PM PDT by bruinbirdman
Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and several colleagues are trying to change Senate rules to make it harder for senators to attach riders to pending legislation.
If they get their way, the riders, known as earmarks in appropriations bills, would face higher hurdles in order to be retained in both policy and appropriations measures.
McCain is scheduled to meet with Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) and Rules Committee Chairman Trent Lott (R-Miss.) as early as today to press for the rule change, aimed at refining the Senate’s germaneness standard for amendments.
McCain’s proposed change would call for a “supermajority” of 60 senators to retain the amendment. This would shift the balance of power to the senators who seek to strike the amendment from those who seek to have it included.
Currently, any senator may move to strike an amendment, but must convince at least 50 of his colleagues to join in opposition. Under the new arrangement, it would up to the proposer of the amendment, rather than the would-be striker, to gather the needed 60 votes.
McCain is working with Democratic Sens. Russ Feingold (Wis.), with whom he collaborated closely last year in securing passage of campaign finance reform legislation, as well as others whose names were not immediately available.
The effort departs from McCain’s signature anti-pork campaign because amendments to policy legislation, as well as appropriations, would face a greater germaneness test under the proposed rule change.
McCain’s move would not affect the separate effort by some Republicans to change Senate rules in order to make it easier to end filibusters of judicial nominees.
McCain has opposed what he sees as excessive earmarks directed to specific projects in a senator’s home state. His efforts have met stiff resistance from members of the Appropriations Committee. He expects a similar fight with his latest attempt to curb so-called earmarks.
“I am sure [Sen. Robert Byrd (D-W.Va.)] will oppose it. The appropriators don’t want any diminution of their powers,” McCain said in an interview last week.
Feingold, who supported a similar effort by McCain last year, said: “There is a problem of all these extraneous items [being] put into appropriation bills and others. We are trying to figure out some ways to weed them out.
“The amount of these special interest items in legislation has gotten worse and worse. Sen. McCain said he saw some statistics that it’s reached an all-time high in the last couple years. I think [McCain] is on the right track,” Feingold added.
Sen. Thad Cochran (R-Miss.), who sits on both the Appropriations and Rules Committees, said, “Everyone has an opportunity to offer amendments in the Senate. There’s full protection afforded under the rules of the Senate to give any senator the opportunity to amend any bill any time. It can’t be restricted here as in the House.”
A change in rules that encounters opposition requires a two-thirds majority, or 67 votes, to overcome a filibuster. A standard filibuster requires 60 votes to defeat.
Lott called McCain’s proposed changes “certainly worth considering,” but added, “[McCain] has certainly made himself clear on the subject many, many times. We’re going to take a look at what he’s talking about, discuss it with the leader, and decide how to proceed.”
A spokesman for Rules Committee ranking member Christopher Dodd (D-Conn.) said, “We haven’t seen [McCain’s proposal] yet, but we will take the time to fully examine it when we do.”
Sen. Ben Nighthorse Campbell (R-Colo.), another member of Appropriations, said that earmarks have “been abused, somewhat,” but also expressed significant reservations toward any change in the rules on earmarks and other amendments.
The pained one seems to create good press with legislation that goes no where even if it takes the Supreme Court to prove it.
yitbos
Dave Barry just had a column on this - according to him Sen. Leahy had attached 500k in lamprey eradication to the war appropriation bill.
I am trying to imagine the justification here - a strong national economy is vital to the nation's defense, Vermont's economy is vital to the nation's, tourism is a big part of Vermont's economy, fishing is an important part of tourism, fisherman hate seeing those ugly suckers when they pull up a fish...
Mrs VS
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.