Deem-ocrats?

For indispensable reporting on the coronavirus crisis, the election, and more, subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily newsletter.


Reporters mobbed House majority leader Steny Hoyer’s (D-Md.) media briefing today, firing off question after question about “deem-and-pass,” a parliamentary maneuver Dems may use to vote on the Senate health care bill and a package of “fixes” simultaneously. Republicans and the press have described the procedure as allowing Democrats to pass health care reform without voting on it—as I left Hoyer’s briefing, the chyron on MSNBC read “No Votes Needed?”—but that’s misleading.

In any case, “real Americans” don’t care about “process” issues like deem-and-pass, Hoyer argued. “In the final analysis, what is interesting to the American public is what we do for them,” Hoyer said. He defended deem-and-pass as “consistent with the rules” and “consistent with former practice,” and he’s right on that front: Republicans set new records for using the procedure when they last controlled the House. That makes the GOP “hypocritical at best” for criticizing Democrats on this front, Hoyer said.

But the criticism of the maneuver isn’t coming just from Republicans. Left-leaning commentators—including The New Republic‘s Jon Chait, the Washington Post‘s Ezra Klein, and our own Kevin Drum—have also slammed the idea, mostly because they believe it’s bad politics for the Dems. Interestingly, Hoyer left open the possibility of using a different procedure to pass the bill. He interrupted himself in the middle of defending “deem and pass” to clarify that his caucus hasn’t settled on using it. “We haven’t decided on a process at this point in time,” he said. “That’s being debated, what process we want to pursue.” Indeed.

DOES IT FEEL LIKE POLITICS IS AT A BREAKING POINT?

Headshot of Editor in Chief of Mother Jones, Clara Jeffery

It sure feels that way to me, and here at Mother Jones, we’ve been thinking a lot about what journalism needs to do differently, and how we can have the biggest impact.

We kept coming back to one word: corruption. Democracy and the rule of law being undermined by those with wealth and power for their own gain. So we're launching an ambitious Mother Jones Corruption Project to do deep, time-intensive reporting on systemic corruption, and asking the MoJo community to help crowdfund it.

We aim to hire, build a team, and give them the time and space needed to understand how we got here and how we might get out. We want to dig into the forces and decisions that have allowed massive conflicts of interest, influence peddling, and win-at-all-costs politics to flourish.

It's unlike anything we've done, and we have seed funding to get started, but we're looking to raise $500,000 from readers by July when we'll be making key budgeting decisions—and the more resources we have by then, the deeper we can dig. If our plan sounds good to you, please help kickstart it with a tax-deductible donation today.

Thanks for reading—whether or not you can pitch in today, or ever, I'm glad you're with us.

Signed by Clara Jeffery

Clara Jeffery, Editor-in-Chief

We Recommend

Latest