Revision as of 20:08, May 30, 2012

Rhetoric around the 72 Hour Rule

"Again, it is rather disturbing, Madam Speaker, that the 72-hour ruleCongressional Record, 3/12/2010

"What good is reading the bill if it's a thousand pages and you don't have two days and two lawyers to find out what it means after you read the bill." Journal Star, Not too much to ask from Congress, 8/1/2009

"Only in Washington will politicians find a way for three days to take less than seventy-two hours, but that's exactly what's House Republican leadership has done," said Rep. Gary Peters. " The American people were promised seventy-two hours to read and review bills before a vote, but instead Republicans are using a 'three day rule' that lets them rush through bills in far less time. If you say 72 hours, you should mean 72 hours, and this kind of political double-speak is why Americans feel Washington is out of touch." Statement by Rep. Peters, 4/15/2011

Weiner objected to consideration of the bill, saying it violates a Houserule, "which requires 72 hour layover of the bill and it to be electronically noticed in order for it to be considered by the House." He continued, "This bill did not lay over for 72 hours. It was noticed at 1:42 p.m. on Tuesday. Therefore it has to wait until 1:42 on Friday to be in compliance with the rules of the House... Would the Speaker please clarify for the body that the 72 hours rule is either being waived or does not exist?" CNN, Dem. tweaks House Republicans ahead of NPR defunding vote, 3/17/2011

"Republicans and Democrats have both rushed legislation in the past; however, this Democratic Majority has been using the fast-track so often that it is raising concern all around. In order to have an honest debate, we need to slow the process down for everyone. And if it is not emergency legislation, is there any real harm in allowing Members and the public three days to digest the legislation?" Examiner.com, 10/8/2009

"The Period of time on which the rule is predicated is not a number of hours, but rather a number of days, specifically calendar days...other than weekends or holidays when the House is not in session." The Hill, 3/17/2011

But when the Budget Control Act comes up for a vote on the House Floor -- arguably the most significant bill under Boehner's leadership -- lawmakers won't have the promised 72 hours to read it. Boehner's office defended the latest move. "This legislation is similar to the House-passed Budget Control Act, with three clear and easy-to-understand changes," Boehner spokesman Michael Steel told Byron York of the Washington Examiner. "We wish there was time to wait three days, but as a result of Washington Democrats' refusal to offer their own plan our backs are against the wall -- and the three-day rule has a clear exception for such emergencies." Heritage Blog, House won't provide 72 hours to review budget control act, 8/1/2011
A collection of Boehner's 72 hour rule rhetoric on video, as compiled by the Sunlight Foundation.
When asked how the proposal squared with GOP management of the House during their recent 12 years of control, Minority Leader Boehner said, "It's time to change a lot of things about how Congress works...whether we are the majority or the minority.", National Journal, Transparency Triumphant?, 9/25/2009.

On September 24, Speaker Nancy Pelosi told The Weekly Standard that she was "absolutely, without question" committed to putting the text of the final House bill online for 72 hours before a vote. But...when asked if Speaker Pelosi will leave the bill online for 72 hours after we see what's in the rule, Pelosi spokesman Brendan Daly replied in an email "No; [the] pledge was to have manager's amendment online for 72 hours, and we will do that." The Weekly Standard, Pelosi breaks pledge to put final health care bill online for 72 hours before vote, 11/5/2009

...Sen. Pat Roberts, R-Kan., pleaded that the Senate Finance Committee have "at least 72 hours for the people that the providers have hired to keep up with all of the legislation that we pass around here..." National Journal, Transparency Triumphant?, 9/25/2009

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 = Rhetoric around the 72 Hour Rule =
+=== Rep. Eric Cantor (R-VA)<span style="text-decoration: underline"></span> ===
+*
+"Again, it is rather disturbing, Madam Speaker, that the ''72-hour rule''[http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?r111:1:./temp/%7Er111kHVkp5:e10807: Congressional Record], 3/12/2010
 === Rep. John Conyers (D-MI) ===