Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

3 Bumps

House May Block Food Safety Bill Over Senate Error

House May Block Food Safety Bill Over Senate Error

File Photo

A food safety bill that has burned up precious days of the Senate’s lame-duck session appears headed back to the chamber because Democrats violated a constitutional provision requiring that tax provisions originate in the House.

By pre-empting the House’s tax-writing authority, Senate Democrats appear to have touched off a power struggle with members of their own party in the House. The Senate passed the bill Tuesday, sending it to the House, but House Democrats are expected to use a procedure known as “blue slipping” to block the bill, according to House and Senate GOP aides.

The debacle could prove to be a major embarrassment for Senate Democrats, who sought Tuesday to make the relatively unknown bill a major political issue by sending out numerous news releases trumpeting its passage.

Section 107 of the bill includes a set of fees that are classified as revenue raisers, which are technically taxes under the Constitution. According to a House GOP leadership aide, that section has ruffled the feathers of Ways and Means Committee Democrats, who are expected to use the blue slip process to block completion of the bill.

“We understand there is a blue slip problem, and we expect the House to assert its rights under the Constitution to be the place where revenue bills begin,” the GOP aide said.

The blue slip could lead to one of two likely outcomes. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) could simply drop the issue and let the next session of Congress start from scratch, a strategy that would allow him time in the lame-duck session to tackle other last-minute priorities, such as the expiring 2001 and 2003 tax cuts, a long-term continuing resolution, an immigration bill and a repeal of the military’s ban on openly gay service members.

Or he could try to force the issue in the Senate after the House passes a new version of the bill. But in order to do that and still tackle the other issues, he would need a unanimous consent agreement to limit debate.

According to Senate GOP aides, a unanimous consent agreement is all but certain to be a nonstarter because the bill’s chief opponent, Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.), will not agree to such a deal.

Coburn “will object and demand changes as [he has] from the get-go,” a GOP aide familiar with the situation said.

This is not the first time that Reid has run afoul of the Constitution’s tax origination provisions. His efforts to pass a tourism promotion bill that was key to his re-election hopes was temporarily stymied earlier this year because the Senate passed a version with revenue raisers similar to those in the food safety bill.

Spokesmen for Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), Ways and Means Democrats and Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa), a co-sponsor of the food safety bill who authored its language, did not immediately return requests for comment. Aides for Ways and Means Democrats also did not immediately return requests for comment.

 
Gal51

Asked by Gal51 at 10:07 AM on Dec. 1, 2010 in Politics & Current Events

Level 23 (15,495 Credits)
This question is closed.
Answers (4)
  • Yes it is true. We have dems pitted against dems. The sensible blue dogs.
    Carpy

    Answer by Carpy at 11:22 AM on Dec. 1, 2010

  • Does anyone know? I had heard that the House had passed a similar bill and that they were going to pass S 510 onto the President via "reconciliation" like they did with the health care bill. This is were Congress would take the House bill passed and the Senate bill passed, and reconcile the inconsistencies between them before passing it to the President to sign. This would keep S 510 from actually being voted on by the house. Does anyone know if this is true? Can you provide me with the house bill number that got passed?
    Gal51

    Comment by Gal51 (original poster) at 10:09 AM on Dec. 1, 2010

  • Good, I can see it because once again the idiots in Washington didn't read and pay attention to what they were signing.
    itsmesteph11

    Answer by itsmesteph11 at 11:41 AM on Dec. 1, 2010

  • Dems pitted against dems. Isn't that usually when Nancy would stand up to the mic and blame republicans for being the party of no?
    grlygrlz2

    Answer by grlygrlz2 at 11:44 AM on Dec. 1, 2010

close Join now to connect to
other members!
Connect with Facebook or Sign Up Using Email

Already Joined? LOG IN