Earlier this week, the editors (of NRO) urged House GOP leaders to unequivocally refuse to allow a conference committee with Senate Democrats on immigration bills, arguing that the most likely outcome would be a ”compromise” bill that looks very similar to the Gang of Eight’s comprehensive proposal.
National Review Online
By Andrew Stiles
August 16, 2013
I’m reminded by a conservative source on Capitol Hill that such a scenario could still play out in the absense (sic) of a conference committee. As I reported last month, even if House leadership declines to go to conference with the Senate (presumably after Republicans pass a number of smaller immigration bills):
. . . there would be nothing preventing the Gang of Eight from reaching out informally to their counterparts in the House to negotiate a compromise bill. Harry Reid could then attach the proposal as an amendment or substitute to an unrelated bill, pass it, and send it to the House, where Boehner would have to decide whether or not to vote on it. To avoid a potential blue-slip challenge, Reid could attach the new bill as an amendment to legislation that raises revenue and has already passed the House.
Therefore, once House Republicans have passed a few of their own immigration bills, Paul Ryan and Eric Cantor, for example, could try to negotiate a grand bargain with members of the Gang of Eight behind closed doors, and bring it to the floor for a vote. Such a scenario is probably more likely than a formal conference committee, which has become increasingly rare on Capitol Hill, especially when it comes to major pieces of legislation. So conservatives wary of the end result of a conference committee should keep in mind that a similar outcome is still possible without one.
Rate this article