Former Rep. John Dingell (D-Mich.) was fond of saying, “I'll letyou write the substance … you let me write the procedure, and I'llscrew you every time.”

The longest-serving member of the House, who retired in 2014,was a legislative wizard.

From his perch as the chairman of the House Education and LaborCommittee, Dingell could make things happen or stop them in theirtracks – all by using the legislative process.

Years ago, a kids' education show, Schoolhouse Rock, presented acartoon version of the legislative process called “I'm Just aBill.” It was a kid's version of what you may have learned in apolitical science textbook.

Don't believe it.

The legislators who control the process can dictate thesubstance of legislation.

And the process usually looks nothing like what you may havelearned as a child.

Although they may abhor everything that Dingell stood for, HouseRepublicans are likely to follow his advice during the next twoyears.

Take tax reform. Republicans have promised to tacklecomprehensive tax reform legislation during the currentCongress.

Credit unions watch tax legislation very carefully for a varietyof reasons. Of course, the main concern is that Congress couldeliminate the income tax exemption they currently receive.

Using regular order, a bill would go through committees in eachhouse and then to the floor.

In the Senate, opponents could filibuster a motion to proceed tothe legislation, the legislation itself and any deal reached byHouse and Senate conferees.

Breaking those filibusters would take 60 votes – a nearimpossibility in this day and age.

That's where those who control the process can make all thedifference.

Congressional Republicans could choose to use the budgetreconciliation process to enact tax reform legislation.

That would short-circuit filibuster efforts by opponents, sincefilibusters are prohibited in the Senate under reconciliationrules.

The legislation would be guaranteed an up-down vote in theSenate, with only a 51-vote margin required for passage.

Republicans already have shown their willingness to use thereconciliation process to push controversial legislation when theypaved the way for Obamacare repeal earlier this year.

So they could use the process to enact tax reform.

House Financial Services Chairman Jeb Hensarling (R-Texas) hasalso raised the possibility of using the budget reconciliationprocess to enact changes to the CFPB.

The budget reconciliation process originally was designed forlegislation that decreased the deficit or the federal debt. Butcongressional leaders discovered that the process is a handy toolfor passing highly partisan legislation that otherwise might beblocked.

And so they began using reconciliation for all sorts ofthings.

Including tax cuts.

If by some chance, credit unions don't like what's in a budgetreconciliation bill, it would be much more difficult to lobbyagainst it, since the process could move relatively quickly.

And they might have a credibility problem if they protest theuse of reconciliation for such purposes.

There is precedence for it.

And among the legislators who used the reconciliation processfor tax cuts was a former chairman of the House BudgetCommittee.

His name?

Jim Nussle.

By the way, I've been called a lot of names during my career:Hack, snoop and even bottom-feeder. But I've never been called someof the names my colleagues in the media and I have been calledduring the past few months.

President Trump recently tweeted a message that was largelyinterpreted as calling all media enemies of the people.

He later clarified that, saying he only meant purveyors of “fakenews.”

Well, that counts me out.

But Trump has labeled any and all news stories that he doesn'tlike as “fake.”

And his chief strategist, Steve Bannon, is on record as callingthe media the opposition party.

The journalists I have met during 35 years in this business areamong the most honorable people I've had the privilege of knowing.They take their jobs – and the accuracy of their work –seriously.

That's being ignored by many people, as the rhetoric becomesmore and more strident.

One friend on Facebook posted a photo with an angry lookingsheriff holding a gun and asking the media something to the effectof, “Are you for us or against us?”

Another Facebook friend – this one a journalist – said she wasconsidering purchasing a handgun because some crazy person may takematters into their own hands.

That's dangerous talk, whether you are a Trump supporter ornot.

There's been a lot of joking about the media being the enemy andthe news that journalists produce as “fake.”

But in reality, it's no joking matter, particularly when someonelike Bannon, who's got open access to the Oval Office, constantlyinflames the situation.

The only way a guy like that should get into the White House isthrough a tour line.

And in our democracy, the press must be allowed to continue tofunction as a check on the powerful, regardless of who's presidentand whether they like a story or not.

David Baumann is a Correspondent-at-Large forCU Times. He can be reached at [email protected].