Thread by @natsfert

Rules Committee hearing is starting. If you're planning to tune in, welcome to the dry policy discussions and monologues that make up the majority of my and every political journalist's life. Watch closely or you'll miss the action. You can stream here:

https://twitter.com/natsfert/status/1468273637643984901

Chairman McGoverns says they'll be talking about the NDAA -SECOND- so go like do some laundry or make some lunch if you haven't and check back in a bit.

LOL idk why but the framing on this shot makes it look like a sitcom.

(its a photo of judiciary committee members who came to testify about the legislation to the rules committee)

Update: committee is talking about Trump and Russia and collusion so .....

time is a circle.

We’ve reached discussion of the NDAA. Chair McGovern says the Senate majority leader is “making it very difficult for a lot of small biz and minority businesses… and I be able to move forward.” Says he’s “deaf in my left ear” from @RepPerlmutter complaining about this issue.

Committee discussion is talking about how this bill works - that they considered just putting #SAFEBanking in the bill. “I pushed this as hard as I’ve ever pushed anything” but says he agrees that if they add any amendments, it’s a “house of cards.”

Rules committee chairman McGovern pointedly says that “the blame is on the Senate” on this.

Ranking member Rogers said he agrees with @RepPerlmutter but also says he’s willing to teach Perlmutter a “lesson in patience” and talks about one of his bills that he’s waited over a decade to get passed.

Committee adding some clarity on what this is: this is not a conference report. Senate would have had to pass their bill first for this to be conference. That’s why technically amendments can still be added. No amendments are added to conference reports.

“If you make any changes to it the chances of continuing forward are remote,” says Rep Adam Smith, chairman of the House Armed Services Committee — which drafted the NDAA.

Perlmutter is in the room.

It’s fascinating that like 90% of this discussion about amendments and things House members from both parties are angry the Senate did not include in this defense bill is an amendment to make banking more available to the cannabis industry.

Sometimes I just step back and think about how much the conversation on cannabis banking has changed in the last few years.

Smith says that this conversation didn’t get safe banking passed but it turned the heat up on the Senate and brought an immense amount of focus to the issue. Says this wasn’t a waste.

Smith also calls out Senate committee chairs (he doesn’t mention @SherrodBrown but that’s who he’s talking about) not taking up bills just because they don’t like it even if it has broad support from other members of Congress.

“Putting it in the NDAA was not my first choice,” says @RepPerlmutter. Says that House goes through regular order and then “hits a kind of emptiness on the other side.”

Perlmutter says he just had a long convo with @SpeakerPelosi, who also has been working hard on banking. Perlmutter says he isn’t going to introduce an amendment, because it would throw a wrench in the NDAA agreement. He says he “isn’t raising the white flag on this thing.”

And that’s that. Perlmutter not introducing amendment, safe officially won’t be in the NDAA. Perlmutter says he won’t quit and will try to bring it back in other bills.