In a floor statement that was highly critical of the media and social media, as well as minority House members, Rep. David Meade (R-Stanford) offered his rebuttal to criticisms of the newly adopted House rules of proceeding on January 5. His comments offered a welcomed explanation of the impact of the rules on the opportunity for debate in this session versus past sessions. 



He did not address changes to the bill posting requirement. Such an explanation would have been equally welcomed.



Meade emphasized that the new rules neither limit nor eliminate debate. He acknowledged that — in contrast to past years when a motion on the previous question was followed by additional debate  — the 2022 rules will terminate debate when such a motion is made and adopted by a two-thirds majority. In departing from past practice, this “slight change” will “limit” debate, but — we must trust — not to the extent feared.



To the extent the rules are regularly suspended — as we have already seen and have regularly seen in past sessions — we take only small comfort in Meade’s explanation. 



That explanation — accompanied by harsh criticism of minority members’ overblown response to the rule changes — might itself be criticized for exaggeration. Meade asserted that he was pleased to see the Democratic minority voice support for democracy since some in the party have “silenced it” during the pandemic. 



He did not elaborate. 



We are still waiting for an explanation of how the new posting rules alter past public posting/notice requirements.