"Majority Rules?" Not Always

Congress has been in session for the last two weeks. I'm getting exposed to increasingly more of the procedures, rules, and customs of Congress with every day that passes. I still only understand about twenty-five percent of what I encounter, but that's better than the ten percent where I started. I've been paying close attention to a specific bill that's been trying to move through Congress: the Family First Prevention and Services Act. This bill, if passed, would accomplish two primary things in child welfare: (1) federal dollars only kick in to support children in the child welfare system once they enter foster care; this bill would make it possible to fund services for families before placing a child in foster care, if it is safe to do so; and (2) it emphasizes using group home placements as a last resort, instead prioritizing the child's family of origin, then kinship foster care, and then foster care, before placing a child in a group home. The Family First bill is a bipartisan bill, with bicameral support as well (that means support from both the House and the Senate). It passed the House in summer 2016 and was expected to fly through the Senate, but instead it has faltered several times. This bill is of special importance to the office where I work and also to me, given my expertise in matters pertaining to the child welfare system. But, that's not really the purpose of this post. Instead, it's to talk about process in the Senate.

One thing that I have learned during my time in Washington is that only very important or very controversial matters go through the traditional process of bringing a bill to the floor for debate and vote. Issues which are not controversial go through a process called "unanimous consent." It's my understanding that in such instances, a Senator goes to the floor of the Senate chamber and requests that a bill be passed by unanimous consent, also called, "UC." This means that every single member of the Senate must approve or that no one can step forward to block it. This procedure is often used for the naming of post offices or passing legislation such as "National Coffee Day" and the like. Well, believe it or not, child welfare legislation usually comes under this umbrella. I have been told that most child welfare legislation is passed through UC. 

I've been reading quite a bit about UC. The primary idea behind UC is that it allows the Senate to move more quickly and effectively than if the traditional rules of the Senate were followed. As the other fellows and I were taught during our crash course back in September, the rules of the House are set up to make decisions and the rules of the Senate are set up to allow debate. But, sometimes the Senate wants to limit debate and UC is one of the rules that is used to allow this. 

Under "normal operating procedures," the Senate must agree to have a bill brought to the floor. Only after the Senate has agreed to bring a bill to the floor can a Senator offer amendments to the bill. The next step toward passing the bill would be to file a motion for cloture. (I didn't know what this word meant until September...and I have a PhD in public policy, so don't feel bad if you also are not familiar with this word!) It means to make a motion to close debate on a piece of legislation. If three-fifths, or 60 of the members agree, the motion passes and additional debate is permitted for the next 30 hours. At this time, the Senate would take the actual vote on the bill. This internet source summarizes all of this better than I have, I am sure. The only other thing that I will add is that these rules stand unless the Senate decides to do something else. The Senate can basically agree to do whatever it wants, as long as it agrees to it, or so I am told. 

The process that I outlined above is lengthy, no? So, back to UC and non-controversial issues. The Senate gives individual legislators much more power than in the House and UC is a great example of that. Since a UC requires every single member of the Senate to approve to measure (or to not object to the measure), all it takes is a single senator's objection to keep a measure from moving forward. And, that's what happened over the past two weeks. I won't get into the specifics or who, what, and why, because I don't want to be seen as talking out of turn, but I will gladly link my readers to the news article and this additional article which identifies that one senator. Additionally, readers can watch a video of the request for UC on the Family First measure and also watch the objection come in. Viewers will want to watch between 4:00 and 5:00 to see this happen. (The requesting senator's response to the objection is worth watching though, too.)

Multiple attempts have been made and they have all failed. Former and current foster youth came to the hill to lobby members of Congress to pass the bill. They told heartbreaking stories of family loss and conveyed hope that the next generation of struggling families would face a different fate. There have been online campaigns to place pressure on the objecting senator (who was eventually joined by the junior senator from his own state in his objections) and probably many more efforts of which I am unaware, as I am floating around the Senate halls trying to get my bearings. For example, as part of writing this post, I did a a simple search on Facebook for the name of this bill (Family First Prevention and Services Act) and I was astonished at the number of hits that came up - all calls for action to pass this major piece of reform legislation. 

Current and former foster youth calling for Congress to pass the Family First Act

Invest now - Save later - #FamilyFirst

#FamilyFirst

 A major effort at reform within the child welfare system, that had broad bipartisan support, as well as support from 500 child welfare-serving or child-focused organizations and professional associations, will not likely pass during this Congress. As a newbie, I have no idea if the powers-that-be will make another stab at it in the next Congress. But, the rules of the Senate have taught me this past week that "majority rules" is not always equated with a win and that we should never, ever, underestimate the power of a single United States senator.