When the US House and Senate pass bills that have the same goal but differ in detail, both houses appoint some members to a “conference committee” and they craft a compromise bill that both houses then vote on. I am looking for the rules/limits on the conference committee. Can the strike out any part or the whole bill and add in anything they want? Are they limited to details in common sections? ie paragraph 7 in the house bill calls for 7 widgets and paragraph 7 in the senate bill calls for 7000 widgets. We compromise and specify 8 widgets.
I have seen examples where items are dropped from the final bill because neither side would compromise. So that much I know they can do.
Of course either house can vote not to approve, but that seems quite rare. How much leeway do the committee members have? Can they add in unrelated items? Can they reverse decision? Say both versions of the bill prohibit something. Could the committee change that to require something? Lets assume whatever they do will be approved by both houses.
Yes, the conference committee members can do pretty much whatever they want, but they also know that if they want anything ultimately to get passed, it will have to be acceptable to a majority of each house. That, and the fact that they are often among the most powerful, influential and well-informed folks on Capitol Hill, means that they have a pretty realistic sense of how to practice “the art of the possible.”
Thanks.
Seems like a lot of power for a few members. They can insert their favorite ideas without hearings or review, confident that time pressure will protect their moves. Once can hope that if someone makes a practice of such things, they stop getting chosen for conference committee. At least one can hope.
Sure, but any member can propose amendments and changes to things; the conference committee isn’t particularly special in that regard. Ultimately whatever they do still has to be voted upon by both chambers. Conference bills have failed in the past when they stray too far from what’s acceptable to one side or the other. It’s not a done deal until the president signs it.
They’re presumably drawn from the members of their chamber that voted for their chamber’s version of the bill, and so can be presumed to want something of substantially that form. And they want whatever compromises they come up with to pass, which it won’t if they diverge too far from what the other legislators want.
One reason I asked about this is that Sen. Inhofe is the senior Senator on the conference committee and has been quoted by Trump that the requirement to change the names of military bases will not be in the final bill. As you know, that requirement is in both the house and senate versions and the bill has passed by veto-proof majorities in both houses. The only way to satisfy Trump would be for the conference committee to go against the will of both houses. I was wondering if that is possible. Apparently it is.
That is just the way things have worked always. Trump has not vetoed any major funding bill in his term, no veto of his has been overrode, and all Presidents either formally or informally signal to the Congress what they would not want to see in the bill that reaches their desk.
Mind that in this case both houses when passing their version did so in the full knowledge that a conference committee would be called, so they each sent their versions with very strong show of support for their respective priorities, knowing they’d be losing something in the process. So that is only suggestive to the conference committee when considering single specific provisions that standing alone may not even have passed at all in one chamber or another. The veto-proof majority that really counts is that on the final bill the President gets to sign, and only if there is a commitment to an override.
I reality, nobody loses their job and no supplies run out on account of a post name one way or the other so depending on the member that provision goes under the “would like” or “should have” rather than the “must be” column. Yes, having Imhofe in it strengthens the President’s hand – under other circumstances a conference commitee could take into account DJT has never vetoed a budget/approps bill, and just pass it accepting there will be a signing statement to the effect that as CinC he has the last word on any recommended name change.