Brian Beutler at Talking Points Memo has an excellent article laying out the endgame for how Speaker Pelosi can bring up the Obama tax cuts for the middle class without having the bill hijacked with a motion to recommit by Republicans:
If Pelosi offered one bill to only extend the middle class cuts, Republicans could use procedural maneuvers to force a separate vote on extending tax cuts for the rich -- a vote Pelosi might well lose. Likewise, if she brought two bills to the floor -- one to extend the middle-income cuts and, one to extend the cuts for the wealthy -- both might pass. That's an outcome she wants to avoid.
Fortunately for her, there's a way out. The House rules allow the Speaker to offer legislation under what's known as suspension of the rules. Under suspension, time for debate is limited and no procedural hijinks are allowed -- but a two-thirds majority of members on hand is required for passage. It's a process often used to fast-track non-controversial legislation, and occasionally used when the majority wants to avoid tough procedural votes forced by the minority. It was part of the reason a 9/11 rescuers health care bill failed two months ago, leading to this fiery speech by Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-NY).
Here's more on this below from Brian Beutler, laying out why it's important to bring up the tax cuts under the suspension rules:
Pelosi could offer two bills under suspension -- one extending tax cuts to the first $250,000 of income, and one extending cuts to income above that level. The latter legislation would almost certainly fail to reach the two-thirds threshold required for passage. The question is: what about the former?
Theoretically, almost all Democrats and Republicans support extending tax cuts to the middle class. But Republicans have intimated that they'd try to block efforts to pass a bill that only extended middle-income cuts, in favor of a bill that extended tax cuts for the rich, too. Under suspension, though, legislation requires 290 votes, and there are only 255 Democrats. That means Republicans would cast the deciding votes -- either in favor of the Obama plan to extend tax cuts to middle-income people, or against it. In the most literal sense, Pelosi would be calling their bluff.
This is how Speaker Pelosi can get around the Republicans and conservative Democrats in the House in standing up for the middle class, and painting the Republicans as being for the wealthy. It addresses the issues with the motion to recommit in bringing the bill up under the normal procedures that had been brought up earlier by David Dayen here. I don't quite agree with David that there's no way around the motion to recommit--there is, as Brian Beutler points out.
It is quite unfortunate that many in the House Democratic caucus want to extend the Bush tax cuts for the rich when studies have shown that it raises the deficit, and that the rich don't even spend the tax cuts in a stimulative fashion like the middle-class do. They instead save it up, and don't spend it on investing in jobs.
And to put it bluntly, forcing a fight between the Democrats and the Republicans on the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy is the best thing that Democrats can do to differentiate themselves from Republicans, and show voters that they're on their side. It's time to highlight the priorities of the middle class, and this tax cut vote is a good way to start. This vote should be embraced, not avoided, and brought up under suspensions to prevent a hijacking of the vote to extend tax cuts for the wealthy. Hopefully it will be done in this legislative manner under Speaker Pelosi.