Legislative process much like making sausage

Lawmaking has been compared to sausage making - lots of sometimes unsavory things are combined to get to the end result. It is an apt description and Americans have had a front row seat to it in regard to health care reform legislation.

And more is to come as the U.S. House and Senate try to meld differing health legislation beginning next week to reach a common bill.

Opponents of health care legislation, primarily Republicans, have criticized the process, especially in the Senate, which was marked by last minute deal-making by Democrats with a few senators to get votes.

Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., was especially critical of concessions made to Sen. Ben Nelson, D-Neb., to get his critical vote to reach the magic number of 60 favorable votes to prevent a filibuster of the legislation.

Graham, a staunch opponent of the current legislation, characterized the deal-making as "sleazy."

Hmmm, I guess it's sleazy when Democrats do it but not when Republicans use the same kind of deal-making to get the legislation they want through Congress. It is common practice by both political parties and it is hypocritical for Republicans to criticize a method they use themselves.

The truth is that the legislative process is usually about deal-making, and voters who don't think that is the case are simply being naive. In an ideal political world, it wouldn't happen and everyone would be driven by pure motives - but ideal circumstances rarely exist, and certainly not in politics.

This "sausage making" is even more likely to happen in the U.S. Senate due to the filibuster, which is basically prolonged speech-making by opponents so progress can't be made, a technique that can guarantee the death of proposed legislation.

It is unfortunate a method exists that allows a minority of senators to control legislation, but the filibuster has been embraced by both parties. In most legislative bodies a simple major rules, as in the case in the U.S. House, but not in the Senate.

The result is a struggle to get the needed votes to prevent a filibuster, especially with controversial legislation. Sixty votes are required and, as the Democrats know all too well, that can be a hard slog.

Proponents of the filibuster say it helps prevent bad legislation. Maybe, but it also is obstructionist and can guarantee that a few senators will hold sway over legislation, forcing the kind of of deal-making that Graham finds so "sleazy."

Of course, even without the filibuster, there would be some deal-making - that is just the legislative process. Call it sleazy if you choose, but it is how laws get made - by both parties.

It would be more helpful to focus on what causes so much deal-making in the Senate rather than criticizing something that both parties are more than happy to use when it is to their advantage.
   The real problem is that a minority can control the legislative process.

---
Terry Ross is director of the Yuma Sun's News and Information Center. E-mail him at tross@yumasun.com or phone him at 539-6870.