The measures that would be voted on aren’t those that were already turned down, but a new set of regulations.
“Around 10 p.m. (ET), the Speaker had apparently seen enough – the sit-in began about 11 hours earlier – and he brought up an unrelated measure for a vote. But not just any unrelated measure: Ryan pushed a bill that would have blocked the Obama administration’s ‘fiduciary rule,’ which improves investment safeguards for consumers.Let that sink in for a moment. In the face of the deadliest mass shooting in American history, House Democrats demanded a debate on possible gun reforms, to which House Republicans responded with a favor for Wall Street lobbyists.Historian Kevin Kruse joked last night, ‘House Dems stage a sit-in for gun control and the GOP pushes it aside to repeal Wall Street regulations? Even [Aaron] Sorkin would think that was too much.’And yet, real life is often stranger than fiction.The vote also had the unintended effect of undermining the principal Republican talking point: that Democrats were wasting time on a ‘stunt’ that detracted from real work the House would have otherwise tackled. NBC News’ Luke Russert, for example, talked to Rep. John Fleming (R-La.) yesterday afternoon, and the far-right congressman complained that the sit-in meant members of Congress were ‘blocking the important legislative work that we do here.’Soon after, Rep. Tom Cole (R-Okla.) added, ‘There’s important legislation to move,’ and Dems were preventing that from happening.Ordinarily, I might be sympathetic to the argument that lawmakers should focus on constructive policymaking, but the day before the sit-in, House Republicans spent time debating ‘Obamaphones’. Last night, the GOP majority, unwilling to consider any changes to gun laws, devoted time to weakening investment safeguards for consumers (the bill failed).”