Estimated read time: 2-3 minutes
This archived news story is available only for your personal, non-commercial use. Information in the story may be outdated or superseded by additional information. Reading or replaying the story in its archived form does not constitute a republication of the story.
SALT LAKE CITY — A recently published YouTube video is sparking some heated debate, and Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, is in the middle of it.
The video was posted over the weekend by Rep. Chris Van Hollen, D-Md. He asks Chaffetz, who was acting as the Speaker Pro Tempore, to present a proposal that he believed would reopen the federal government by accepting the Senate's clean continuing resolution.
"Pursuant to Clause 4 of Rule 22, I move that the House take from the Speaker's table the Senate Amendment to the House Joint Resolution 59, recede from its amendment and concur in the Senate amendment to open the government now," Van Hollen said in the video.
"Under Section 2 of House Resolution 368, that motion may be offered only by the majority leader or his designee," Chaffetz replied to him in the video.
Van Hollen then began pressing Chaffetz with a series of "parliamentary inquiries" asking whether or not House Republicans changed the rules, specifically House Rule 22, the rule about bills with House or Senate amendments.
Chaffetz said the House had changed the operation of the rule.
"So, I just want to understand, Mr. Speaker, this standing rule of the House, which I have here, has been altered by the House. Is that what the Speaker is saying?" Van Hollen said in the video.
Chaffetz goes on to confirm that the House had adopted a rule to change it.
Utah Democratic Party Chairman Jim Dabakis said Chaffetz was assigned with defending an indefensible political stance.
It is a terrible thing for democracy, for America and for the people of Utah who are now paying (over) $165,000 a day just to keep our national parks open.
–Utah Democratic Party Chairman Jim Dabakis
"They suspended regular rules and made it so that the Speaker of the House can decide everything," Dabakis said.
Dabakis said giving all of the power to one person, in this case House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, is a bad decision.
"It is a terrible thing for democracy, for America and for the people of Utah who are now paying [over] $165,000 a day just to keep our national parks open," Dabakis said.
Chaffetz did not return calls for an interview, however, some political analysts say changing parliamentary procedures is a very common practice, and both Democrats and Republicans have done it many times over the last decade. But, what is the benefit of giving only one person the ability to call for a vote on the matter?
"The benefit, for Republicans, is that it gives them more control in this debate and their ability to dictate the terms," said Hinckley Institute of Politics Director Kirk Jowers
While Jowers said modifying parliamentary procedure was common, he said lawmakers are using these changes to make things more difficult in Congress.
