A Mother’s Day Distortion

May 10th, 2008 by Kate

On Wednesday, the U.S. House of Representatives passed their yearly resolution honoring mothers and Mother’s Day. A noble gesture meant to signify the love and appreciation that all Americans feel toward the women who bore us. But this year’s resolution is wrapped in a little bit of controversy and a whole lot of distortion.

It started when the Washington Post’s Dana Millbank published a story entitled “Republican’s Vote Against Moms; No Word Yet on Puppies and Kittens.” This article was then picked up by two of Montana’s lefty bloggers who used it’s finer points to argue that Montana Representative Denny Rehberg didn’t vote to support mothers. But their argument leaves a lot to be desired.

First off, the bill honoring Mother’s Day was H. Res. 1113. According to the Library of Congress, Rehberg voted for H. Res. 1113. In fact, the resolution passed 412-0. Which would suggest that every Member who voted, supported the Mother’s Day resolution.

So, where did the Montana bloggers and Millbank get the idea that House Republicans didn’t support the resolution? Because after the vote was complete, Rep. Tiahrt (R-Kans.) moved for a “motion to reconsider.” A motion supported by 178 House Republicans. But despite the motion’s name, Rehberg’s support for the motion doesn’t undo his support for the Mother’s Day resolution.

According to the House Rules Committee’s website, a motion to reconsider:

Under Rule XVIII, the motion to reconsider is available to any Member who votes on the prevailing side of a question and who wishes to move reconsideration on the same or succeeding legislative day. This normally only occurs when Members (usually Minority party Members) determine there is a need to slow down the legislative process.

So, why would Millbank and the lefty bloggers insinuate that this motion showed the Republicans disdain for mothers and Mother’s Day? Because it makes Rehberg sound like the Big Bad Wolf. Nevermind the fact that the motion to reconsider doesn’t change the fact that H. Res. 1113 passed unanimously.

Rehberg is on the record supporting Mother’s Day, as are 411 of his House Colleagues. His vote for the motion to reconsider doesn’t change that. But why let a little thing like the facts get in the way of a catchy headline?

5 Responses to “A Mother’s Day Distortion”

Mark T

May 10th, 2008 - 12:51 pm

At this point one must ask the obvious question: Who the hell cares?

Wiley Cody

May 10th, 2008 - 3:43 pm

Your mom!

(Sorry, couldn’t resist)

Gee Guy

May 10th, 2008 - 10:31 pm

I never thought I would say this, but I wholeheartedly agree with Mark T.

Jenny

May 11th, 2008 - 8:58 am

I think the point of the Post article was to ridicule the shinanagins of the House Republicans on using proceedural votes to slow down the legislative process. They seem to have gone a bit overboard on pushing politics over policy. Next time, they might want to reconsider votes based on a policy position, rather than just being contrary.

Doug

May 11th, 2008 - 9:43 pm

I suppose when it’s all said and done he should have taken the principled stand and voted ‘present’.

Leave a Reply