TEA Party Activists Hold Chet Edwards' Feet To Fire

Rules suspension is about "bipartisan legislation"

Angered and confused, a group of TEA Party activists stood
in the bright sunshine and blustering March winds at the
corner of 6th Street and Austin Avenue in downtown Waco
today at noon and tried to fathom the conflicting
information they received from internet sources and
Congressional staff.

On the one hand, on-line voting records proclaimed that
Congressman Chet Edwards had voted along with 221 other
Representatives to "suspend the rules;" on the other hand,
they were told by office staffers upstairs in the 17th
Congressional District Office that the Representative had
not voted in favor of the "Slaughter Solution."

Something was not quite right.

House Resolution 1190, on House Calendar No. 174 of the
111th Congress, Second Session, is captioned as "Providing
for consideration of motions to suspend the rules."

On March 17, 2010, St. Patrick's Day, "Mr. McGovern, from
the Committee on Rules, reported the following resolution,
which was referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be
printed."

In six lines, the document reads, "Resolved, That it shall
be in order at any time through the calendar day of March
21, 2010, for the Speaker to entertain motions that the
House suspend the rules. The Speaker or her designee shall
consult with the Minority Leader or his designee on the
designation of any matter for consideration pursuant to this
resolution."

TEA Party activist Michael Simon read the document supplied
by the Congressman's staff over a battery-powered bullhorn.
His words echoed off the faces of buildings and across the
parking lots of downtown Waco.

"What does it mean?" People asked the question of each
other.

"What does it mean?"

The murmur rose through the crowd amid the honking of horns
circling the block to protest the Congressman's actions,
perceived as a betrayal of a promise to vote nay on the
Obama Health Care initiative.

Inside the second floor office, staffers were telling
visitors that Mr. Edwards had not voted for the Senate bill.
Neither, they said, had he voted for the Slaughter Solution.

"That was not the Slaughter Rule," said District Director
Myrtle Johnson. "That was to suspend the rules."

Asked by concerned constitutents and reporters, she said
that to suspend the rules is not the same action as to pass
the Slaughter Solution.

Earlier, the crowd had heard Mr. Simon tell them that such a
measure is usually used to handle much smaller matters,
administrative details such as naming bridges and opening
Post Offices at new locations, adjourning sessions of
Congress, or passing bills that are enacted in recognition
of local accomplishments and heralding the accomplishments
of certain people in various Congressional Districts.

The crowd of people burst into laughter when he compared
Obama Care with those matters. "This suspension of rules is
never used to approve a spending bill that is equal to one-
sixth of the American economy each year and has an overall
estimated cost over ten years of one trillion dollars!"

What it means, he said, is that Speaker of the House Nancy
Pelosi will be able to inform the Minority Leader that the
majority leadership has reached an accord on the amendments
to the bill returned by the Senate and the bill is therefore
deemed accepted, something that is scheduled to take place
on Sunday.

The crowd of about 50 people, most of them hoisting signs
that said things like "Chet Thinks You're Stupid," or "Honk
If You Love Freedom," booed and hissed their disapproval.

Meanwhile, the cars continued to circle the 600 block of
Austin Avenue, the drivers raising merry hell with their
horns.

Upstairs, again a smaller delegation of reporters and
concerned citizens piled into the Congressman's reception
room, signed the guest book and waited until Ms. Johnson
came out of the inner office to answer questions.

She said, "It's the total perception that is an up and down
vote on the Slaughter Rule." She insisted it is not.

"It's just a suspension of the rules."

"It's two seperate things."

A gentleman in the small throng spoke up and said, "All he
had to do is give (Mrs. Speaker) Pelosi the authority to use
it...It's the same thing."

A woman who had driven all the way form Burleson to attend
the noon rally, Ms. Maggie Wright, said she and a companion
had stopped at the Cleburne District Office of
Representative Edwards where they confronted a man who
answered the phone at the Capitol Hill office and tried to
tell them the same thing.

"How does it feel to be a liar for a liar?" she said she
asked him, though he refused to give his name when she asked
him for it.

"Whatever he's done in 17 years, he just lost all his credit
for that with what he did yesterday and today," a man said
in a very loud and angry tone.

As it turns out, Ms. Johnson was right. She just didn't
have the specific language the Congressman intended to
release, as yet.

Several hours later, Public Information Officer Josh Taylor
contacted The Legendary with this written statement
generated by Congressman Edwards:

"It is a shame that some are so desperate to misrepresent my
position on the health care bill that they will say
anything. That is the kind of gotcha politics that people
are sick and tired of.

"The fact is that I voted ‘no’ on the House health care bill
last November, and I will vote ‘no’ on the Senate bill in
the next few days.

"In addition, on Monday, I voted in the Budget Committee to
stop this process altogether by voting against using
reconciliation to pass the health care bill.

"Yesterday, the vote I cast for H. Res. 1190 was to allow
non-controversial, bipartisan legislation to be brought up
on the House floor on Saturday and Sunday while we are
waiting for the health care vote.

"I will vote ‘no’ on the Slaughter rule, ‘no’ on using
reconciliation and ‘no’ on the final health care bill."