As a result of a resolution passed this evening, 9-4, in the House Rules Committee [which wasn't announced in advance of its 4 p.m. meeting on other matters]:

RESOLUTION

Resolved, That the requirement of clause 6(a) of rule XIII for a two-thirds vote to consider a report from the Committee on Rules on the same day it is presented to the House is waived with respect to any resolution reported on the legislative day of Thursday, February 14, 2008, relating to a bill addressing foreign intelligence surveillance.

Sec. 2. It shall be in order at any time on the legislative day of Thursday, February 14, 2008, for the Speaker to entertain motions that the House suspend the rules relating to a bill addressing foreign intelligence surveillance.

Http://www.rules.house.gov/SpecialRules_details.aspx?NewsID=3224

This could just be an effort to quickly pass another, shorter or longer, PAA extension after further consideration (which some apparent Republican rules committee 'no' votes might suggest), or it's quite possible that it's the beginning of the same subterfuge that was utilized to shove the original Protect America Act through the House, unamended after Senate passage, last August.

Democratic members of the House Rules Committee who just voted on this matter, would know which it is. Those members are:

Mike Arcuri, New York (co-manager)

Louise Slaughter, New York, Chair

Jim McGovern, Massachusetts

Alcee Hastings, Florida

Doris Matsui, California

Dennis Cardoza, California

Peter Welch, Vermont

Kathy Castor, Florida

Betty Sutton, Ohio

Given Speaker Pelosi's history, and the seemingly unexpected failure of the leadership's 21-day extension of the PAA today (which was perhaps not unexpected in the least and was instead supposed to count as the 'old college try'), I have to give more credence to the second possibility: That this is leadership subterfuge in preparation for ramming the Senate FISA bill with immunity through the House on Thursday.

Http://www.rules.house.gov/

It is, however, still possible that this rule is simply connected to establishing a conference committee with the Senate on FISA, or proposing another PAA extension as I said, given the looming Friday sunset of PAA. Here's hoping that it's something of that nature, in line with Speaker Pelosi's thus-far promising rhetoric on her Gavel blog, rather than a repeat of August's performance complete with corporate lawbreaking immunity as the cherry on top.