The Hundred Hour Bull

The Democrats claim that they lived up to their campaign promise and enacted six major bills in their first 100 hours in office. The actual number is a fat, round, zero. None of the bills the Democrats are touting so far have made it into law and four of the six have been approved only by the House.

As every school child who passed civics knows (but important parts of the media somehow ignored), to become a law the Senate must act as well and the president must append his signature. So far, as we are moving to 100 days of the new Democratic regime, not one of these six bills has completed that passage. Indeed, several of them may well not become the law of the land at least during this Congress.

During the 2006 elections campaign Democrats treated the House and Congress as if they were synonymous and the president's veto power was barely mentioned. Typically, on election day Nancy Pelosi stated, "If you honor Democratic candidates with your vote today, in the first hundred hours of a Democratic Congress: We will restore civility, integrity, and fiscal responsibility to the House of Representatives. We will start by cleaning up Congress..."

After the elections, the New York Times reported that the "House Democrats intend to kick off their new regime with a 100-hour legislative blitz that would allow them to post a series of quick victories before President Bush even delivers his State of the Union address toward the end of this month. 'These are deliverable,' Brendan Daly, a spokesman for the incoming House speaker, Nancy Pelosi, said of the 100-hour topics. 'These are things we said we would do if we are in charge and would make a direct impact on Americans' lives.'"

Soon we were told mission accomplished. Writing about a "new direction for all Americans," Nancy Pelosi claimed that, "From national security to economic security, our first 100 hours met the urgent priorities of the American people, turning our promises into reality...."

Even conservative columnist Robert Novak was at least temporarily swayed, reporting that "The 'hundred hours' program of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) has been a success beyond all anticipation..." Some even crowed that the Democratic revolution took less than 100 hours. "After 42 Hours (or So), House Democrats Complete 100-Hour Push," according to a New York Times headline. House Majority Leader Steny H. Hoyer stated, "[Republicans] can make fun of it...But they cannot make fun of the fact that for the first time in 10 years, we have raised the minimum wage." Well not so fast.

Actually, while the fate of each of the six bills Democrats passed in the House as part of their 'new America' is somewhat different, all, at this stage, are neither laws nor public policies.

H.R. 1: to lead to the implementation of the 9/11 Commission recommendations. The Senate has passed a version of this bill and negotiations to reconcile the House and Senate versions are underway. But reconciliation of the two bills is likely to prove a moot point. This measure faces a veto from the White House. As thirty five senators --enough to block a veto override-- signed a letter concurring with the Bush administration position opposing the bill.

H.R. 2: sought to raises the minimum wage from $5.15 per hour to $7.25 per hour over two years. The Senate version of the minimum wage increase includes tax cuts for small businesses. Negotiations to reconcile the House and Senate bills are underway. This bill is the one that may actually make it.

H.R. 3: The House voted to increases the number of stem cell lines available for federally funded research. Like other budgetary items it requires Senate action, which has not taken place. Anyhow the president is very likely to veto this bill.

H.R. 4: The House "required" the Secretary of Health and Human Services to negotiate with drug companies for lower prices for Medicare patients' drugs. However, the House alone cannot require the Secretary of HHS to do much of anything and the Senate has not passed such a requirement.

H.R. 5: The House voted to reduces the interest rate for subsidized federal student college loans from 6.8 percent to 3.4 percent over five years. No Senate action; no interest reduction.

H.R. 6: The same holds for the House vote to reverses oil and gas royalty reductions and devotes the money to promotion of renewable energy sources.

Thus when the New York Times reports (on April 7) about the marvel of the "many bills that passed in Congress's first 100 days" more than a technical error is at issue; a House not a Congress makes. At issue is the difference between bills that change the laws of the land and public policies--and those that do nothing of the sort. Some of the bills the Democrats passed in the House may indeed one day have such an effect. For now they, arguably, are indications of good intentions, but little more.

It matters little if one favors or opposes some or all of these bills. One still seeks truth in advertising. It is unnecessarily confusing to the public to claim victory where none was achieved, organizing celebratory parades where there is nothing to march about. It even does not matter here whether one is a Republican or Democrat; in either case one can recognize that if we are to have a workable government, the parties must pursue policies that can gain majority support in both houses and the president's approval. Otherwise they are merely out to score political points, which have the half-life of yesterday's newspaper.

Comments

[Corinne]

I see this has been cross-posted over at the Daily Kos. You should be aware that posting a diary but not staying for the comments and questionsthat follow--known as a 'hit and run'--violates community norms.

[eric]

This was cross-posted at TPM Cafe. I commented there and am cross-posting my comments here:

At best, this column is disnigenuous. At worst, it is some kind of hatchet job like one might expect from Bob Novak or the like.

"The Democrats claim that they lived up to their campaign promise and enacted six major bills in their first 100 hours in office."

Who has said this? What I've heard is that the House Democrats passed everything that they promised to pass. They did. This column even admits that. So what's the problem?

The problem appears to be the aurthor's willful incredulity of how the legislative process works. We all *knew* Bush didn't support at least some of these policies. We all *knew* the Democrats don't have some kind of super-majority that could force these bills into law.

There can be no question - the House Democrats did what they said they would do and that's not *bull*. The bull is in this column.