Lori Sturdevant: 'Broken Branch' still needs fixing

Ornstein says congressional Democrats are repeating Republicans' mistakes.

By LORI STURDEVANT, Star Tribune

Last update: July 15, 2009 - 10:37 AM

Republicans in the U.S. House of Representatives are being systematically denied the rightful role of the loyal opposition, GOP Rep. John Kline of Minnesota's Second District said when he called on the Star Tribune Editorial Board several weeks back.

"We're not able to have good debate," Kline lamented. "We've become more and more partisan. The Democrats write their version [of bills], the Republicans write their version; the two don't come together, and the rules of the House don't even let their version even be debated on the floor or voted on."

That complaint nearly matches the one Democrats made when they were in the minority before the 2006 election. And it is part of the dysfunction that political scientist Norman Ornstein of the American Enterprise Institute described along with co-author Thomas Mann in their 2006 book, "The Broken Branch: How Congress is failing America and what can be done about it."

Star Tribune editorial writer Lori Sturdevant asked Ornstein, a Minnesota native, about the U.S. House's propensity for bipartisanship this year. Here is an excerpt of his response:

"Tom Mann and I have been tracking this. We're disappointed in some ways that Democrats have not moved nearly as far as they could to recreate a regular order. We've had more closed and structured rules, even than under the last two years of the Republicans." (Closed rules mean debates in which amendments are either disallowed, or strictly limited.)

"But this is not simply a one-way street. Look at the appropriations bills. ... The Republicans were offering 150 to 200 amendments, not because they had a bunch of amendments that made a lot of sense, but because they wanted to slow-walk the process.

"Then Steny Hoyer (D-Md.), the majority leader, met with his counterpart, John Boehner (R-Ohio) and said, 'Let's come to an agreement here. You limit the number of amendments. We'll allow plenty. We'll allow more than we usually allow on these bills. But you talk to your members, and keep them from running out of control.' Basically, the Republican leaders said, 'We're not going to agree to that.'

"So the Democrats came back with structured rules. Those rules don't eliminate amendments. They allowed 30 or 40 on each bill. But they are picking the 30 or 40.

"One of the things that's driving Republicans nuts is that they [the Democrats] are requiring that amendments be preprinted. That's because we were seeing a lot of amendments that were just designed as 'gotcha' things. They wanted to stop that.

"But unfortunately, what that also does is it means that you can't offer an amendment to an amendment. In the name of trying to block embarrassment, you're also cutting off the free flow of debate, information and opportunities.

"It's the responsibility of the majority to suck it up, take some embarrassment, and understand that there will be a lot of irresponsibility on the part of the minority. You have to take some of that, bend over backwards, and know that you've still got the upper hand. You're still the majority. I don't think the Democrats have done nearly enough of that.

"Even if they think they've got an obdurate and uncooperative minority, it's the majority's responsibility to have some openness to ideas in committee and on the floor. But it's the responsibility of the minority to be responsible. That means no delay for the sake of delay, and limiting the things that are put out purely for the sake of political embarrassment."

Recent Commentary stories

Google roundup: Hear, hear, for standing up against evil - July 15, 2009

Google roundup: Hear, hear, for standing up against evil - Google may not win its fight against the Chinese government, but bless it for trying. More

Comment on this story | Read all 7 comments | Hide reader comments

About Opinion Exchange

Opinion Exchange is produced by the Editorial Department, which is dedicated to hosting the discussion on a range of issues of interest to Star Tribune readers online and in print. In its new format, it's our hope that Opinion Exhange will create a more dynamic dialogue between Star Tribune readers and the Editorial Board. Many individual posts will be written and signed by members of the Editorial Board and will reflect their own opinions. Daily editorials will continue to represent the institutional voice of the newspaper and be researched and written by the Editorial Department, which is independent of the newsroom.

Subscribe to RSS|Learn more about RSS