Pelosi scraps proxy voting plan after GOP outcry

Speaker Nancy Pelosi is backing off a plan to muscle through a major rules change to the way House lawmakers vote during the coronavirus pandemic, and has announced a bipartisan task force to further study the issue before taking any action.

Pelosi announced the sudden change of plans during a call with her leadership team Wednesday morning, saying she would no longer push to change House rules this week to allow members to vote by proxy after vocal Republican opposition. The California Democrat made the decision after talking with House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) for nearly an hour earlier Wednesday, aides said.

Instead, the House will vote Thursday on whether to establish a select coronavirus oversight committee, a plan Pelosi announced earlier this month. House Majority Whip Jim Clyburn of South Carolina will chair the panel, but it’s unclear whether Republicans, who have sharply criticized the committee, will participate. The House will also vote Thursday to pass a coronavirus relief package of nearly $500 billion to aid small businesses that had been stalled for weeks.

In his call with Pelosi earlier Wednesday, McCarthy told Pelosi he didn’t believe the oversight panel was necessary and would hold off on appointing Republicans until he sees who Democrats appoint.

Still, Democrats moved ahead with plans for the additional oversight on Wednesday evening, with the House Rules panel teeing up a vote to formally establish the new select committee on the floor for Thursday.

Pelosi’s snap decision avoids a nasty partisan fight with Republicans over the proxy voting as Congress wrestles with the continuing coronavirus crisis, which has led to the deaths of more than 45,000 Americans and plunged the country into its worst economic crisis since the Great Depression.

Top Democrats had planned to move ahead with the rules change this week, first voting on the proposal in the House Rules Committee on Wednesday night before moving to the floor Thursday. Democrats expected to have enough support on their side to approve the monumental change — which would temporarily upend more than 200 years of voting norms in the chamber — though little, if any, backing from Republicans was expected.

The House Rules Committee, instead, approved the new oversight subcommittee on Wednesday over the firm objections of Republicans, who criticized the effort as superfluous and politically minded.

Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) blasted the panel as a political operation to help presumptive Democratic nominee Joe Biden defeat President Donald Trump in 2020.

“We have eight different entities looking at this. Why the ninth? Do we need a tenth?” Jordan, a longtime member of the House Oversight panel, argued.

“I say, we could have 100, and that still won’t match what we’re facing today,” countered Rep. Ed Perlmutter (D-Colo.), who sits on the Rules panel. “This is so big, this is bigger than anything you and I have had to contend with.”

At times, the hearing grew tense, with Jordan and Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) getting into a shouting match over the select committee on Benghazi to probe then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

“You may not be wearing a mask, but you adhere to the rules of this committee, while you’re here!” Raskin roared at Jordan, who had been interrupting him. McGovern was eventually forced to intervene to stop the shouting between the two.

“That’s what we should be focused on — a plan, instead of whining about the fact that we’re going to have an oversight committee,” Raskin said.

The meeting of the House Rules Committee is the chamber’s largest gathering of lawmakers since late March, when members approved a $2 trillion coronavirus relief package by voice vote amid the pandemic.

Already, the differences are stark: The Rules panel, which is typically crowded into a tiny, third-floor room in the Capitol, was moved to a cavernous room typically used by the Ways and Means Committee. Lawmakers were scattered across the dais, nearly all wearing masks, with minimal staff in attendance.

Hundreds more lawmakers are expected to return to Washington on Thursday to approve the next tranche of economic and health aid. All are encouraged to follow strict guidance from the House’s attending physician, including the proper use of masks and hand sanitizer before and after leaving the floor.

Democrats say they will continue to discuss the idea of proxy voting, but with more input from the GOP.

The House will form a bipartisan task force that includes McCarthy, and House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) will “review remote voting by proxy and reopening the House,” according to a senior Democratic aide. Reps. Jim McGovern (D-Mass.) and Tom Cole (R-Okla.), the leaders of the House Rules Committee, and Reps. Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.) and Rodney Davis (R-Ill.), top lawmakers on the House Administration panel, will also serve on the task force.

The idea of proxy voting had won the backing from Hoyer and McGovern, under pressure from dozens of lawmakers who worried that Congress would be seen as sitting on its hands during this crisis unless it had some kind of remote voting power. The proposal for proxy voting was especially popular among the Democrats’ most endangered members, who feared the inability to vote could hurt them politically.

Democrats were also looking to change the chamber’s rules on committee hearings, which would give members more flexibility to hold events remotely. Hoyer said during Wednesday’s caucus call that committees will begin to work in a “virtual context” but did not provide details.

But Democrats’ push to overhaul the House rules during the pandemic met with resistance from Republicans, who say they were left out of the discussions.

Cole said Tuesday he didn’t support the idea — which he said “diminishes the power of the institution” — and said few of his colleagues would either.

“We could be up and operating within normal parameters,” Cole said in an interview. “Instead, we’re dreaming up ways to keep us out of Washington longer.”

Melanie Zanona contributed to this report.

CORRECTION: This article has been updated to correctly identify a member of the Rules committee.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *