News
Sep 15 2006
Lawmakers urge limit on 'secret holds'
A bipartisan group of senators wants those responsible for holds to be identified within 72 hours of placing them.
WASHINGTON — A bipartisan group of senators called for a time limit on "secret holds" Thursday, after the public disclosure of the names of two senators who tried to use the parliamentary tool to derail open-government legislation.
The senators seeking the limit — Republicans Trent Lott of Mississippi and Charles Grassley of Iowa and Democrats Chris Dodd of Connecticut and Ron Wyden of Oregon — said they are not against using holds to learn more about a bill before voting on its passage. They just want those responsible for the holds to be identified within 72 hours of placing the hold.
Majority Leader Bill Frist of Tennessee informally requires his fellow Republicans to make their holds public within 72 hours, but the practice is not a Senate rule and does not apply to Democrats.
"Secret holds undermine the accountability and the credibility of the U.S. Senate," Wyden said.
He was referring to holds placed by Ted Stevens, R-Ala., and Robert Byrd, D-W.Va., in August to stop legislation that would require the creation of a searchable database of about $1 trillion in annual federal spending.
Their action unleashed a torrent of criticism from government watchdog groups.
The database measure, introduced by Sens. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., and Barack Obama, D-Ill., finally passed the House and Senate on Wednesday after the leadership of both parties intervened to end the holds. It now heads to the White House for President Bush's signature.
There are two ways for the bipartisan group of senators to pass a time limit on secret holds: Lott, chairman of the Senate Rules Committee, could bring up the proposal there as a rule change. Or, they could amend any bill scheduled for a vote.
Ellen Miller, executive director of the Sunlight Foundation, a nonpartisan group that seeks more government transparency, welcomed the proposal but predicted that it would have difficulty passing.
"Their peers are whispering behind their backs, wondering if they have lost their minds," Miller said. The secret hold practice "benefits both Democrats and Republicans, so few will want to end it."
The senators seeking the limit — Republicans Trent Lott of Mississippi and Charles Grassley of Iowa and Democrats Chris Dodd of Connecticut and Ron Wyden of Oregon — said they are not against using holds to learn more about a bill before voting on its passage. They just want those responsible for the holds to be identified within 72 hours of placing the hold.
Majority Leader Bill Frist of Tennessee informally requires his fellow Republicans to make their holds public within 72 hours, but the practice is not a Senate rule and does not apply to Democrats.
"Secret holds undermine the accountability and the credibility of the U.S. Senate," Wyden said.
He was referring to holds placed by Ted Stevens, R-Ala., and Robert Byrd, D-W.Va., in August to stop legislation that would require the creation of a searchable database of about $1 trillion in annual federal spending.
Their action unleashed a torrent of criticism from government watchdog groups.
The database measure, introduced by Sens. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., and Barack Obama, D-Ill., finally passed the House and Senate on Wednesday after the leadership of both parties intervened to end the holds. It now heads to the White House for President Bush's signature.
There are two ways for the bipartisan group of senators to pass a time limit on secret holds: Lott, chairman of the Senate Rules Committee, could bring up the proposal there as a rule change. Or, they could amend any bill scheduled for a vote.
Ellen Miller, executive director of the Sunlight Foundation, a nonpartisan group that seeks more government transparency, welcomed the proposal but predicted that it would have difficulty passing.
"Their peers are whispering behind their backs, wondering if they have lost their minds," Miller said. The secret hold practice "benefits both Democrats and Republicans, so few will want to end it."
