Login Here
The Washington Post wraps up the year of Democrats in Congress not with a bang but with a whimper. While I'm as disappointed as anyone about their failures, there's something just wrong here:
Some senior Democrats have grown so distraught that they do not expect any significant change in Iraq policy unless a Democrat wins the White House in 2008. "It's unfortunate that we may have to wait till the elections," Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (Mass.) said yesterday.
This has left many Democrats resorting to openly political arguments, picking up a theme that Republicans hurled at them -- obstructionism -- during their many years in the minority. Sen. Charles E. Schumer (N.Y.) conceded that it is time for Democrats to forget about trumpeting accomplishments that voters will never give them credit for -- and time to change the message to a starkly political one: If you want change, elect more Democrats.
Okay, check it. This is not one of those "everybody does it when they're in the minority" situation. See the chart above. The GOP is on track to use the filibuster in unprecedented numbers this year to keep the Democrats from passing legislation. It's not a political argument, there's an order of magnitude that's being ignored. You can make a chart. It's sometimes referred to as a "fact."
Then there's this:
Sen. Richard J. Durbin (Ill.), the Senate Democratic whip tasked with trying to find 60 votes for a filibuster-proof majority, acknowledged this week that Democrats' biggest failure stemmed from expecting "more Republicans to take an independent stance" on Iraq. Instead, most of them stood with Bush.
It's the same messaging Pelosi was using yesterday in The Hill. Did they focus group that, or just wing it? Did they not notice the overt similarity to the "nobody could have predicted" language that's been coming out of theBushCo. excuse factory? I'm guessing it was conjured by the same shop that delivered "together we can do better" as the Democratic slogan.
Sometimes you just want to throw your hands up over your face and scream, "the horror."
(chart via Campaign for America's Future, via Yglesias)
Share This 
Spotlight
Support this site!
Keep
up with news
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Advanced search
no way
way.
I’ve confessed to being the slow learner before…parliamentary stuff and cloture go right over my head. But I do understand obstructionist behavior.
Anyone stands with this President is not for democracy (see Hugh’s list). They are not for American democracy. They are poseurs. They turn their backs on their people to lick a dictator’s boots.
Dodd/Edwards.
Democrats make me sad.
Nothing wrong with obstructionism if you are obstructing B.S.
Counting on small numbers of Republicans to act in good faith and support your “consensus” bills is pure folly. They act in lock step, and their only desire is to win (whatever that means).
Best political chart of the year.
But Dodd/Edwards makes me happy!
Being obstructive is part of the platform, and thus invisible to the world, if you’re a GOoPer? (I notice that the number jumped after Bush41 left office, and has never dropped back to pre-Clinton levels.)
(I’d make a suggestion on what could be done with WaPo, but the Lurking Mods would not be happy.)
So the 107th Congress set the (now old) record of 61 cloture votes. Wasn’t that an R minority Senate then as well?
And the record has been broken already with a year to go in the 110th Congress and is on pace to be more than double the previous record.
Yet the Dems are incapable of framing this to take out Toothless Mitch and company.
If Dodd does not get the nod for President, then Dodd for Majority Leader. Please.
Interestingly, the Repugs haven’t actually filibustered any bills in the 110th, just threatened to do so… Why not force them to actually filibuster…?
I wouldn’t mind failure on the dems part if they’d gone down swingin’ with all the majority tools available. They should have forced the repugs to filibuster EVERY TIME they threatened. Call their bluffs! Enforce the subpoenas. Charge inherent contempt of Congress if necessary. So many times they could have confronted the repugs and this president.
The leadership chose instead to “keep their powder dry” and now they’re going down whining about what the meanies across the aisle did. Screw that!
I’m not a happy camper right now.
Is there any way to influence election of Senate or House leaders? I had heard little or nothing about Harry Reid before Daschele lost and Reid was elected. I don’t know if they select them based on rules knowledge, favors owed, or what.
Because dems are spineless jerks.
Had they done they repukes could be called for the obstructionist assholes that they are.
If the Democrats fail to capture the WH next year, then in all liklihood, I will leave the Democratic Party. This, after 39 years of voting the straight Demo ticket.
Because the leadership is a bunch of morons. Seriously. While the traditional media laps it up, the lefty blogostan sees right through it. Pelosi and Reid are being played for the chumps they seem to be. The question is why does the rest of the caucus let them get away with it.
from the wapoo today:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/.....01819.html
(blergh and bold mine)
and then there’s this sadness from the Kucinich site– for anyone wanting to leave messages of sympathy there is a link available.
http://www.dennis4president.co.....1019%1007/
and Jane, it is a horror!
I don’t get that either CTuttle. The people who barely pay attention to political news will never get the obstruction (especially since it’s nowhere to be found in the MSM) unless they see it played out, ie. filibustered. The Senate is tied up and doing nothing anyways, so why doesn’t Reid make the Repugs actually filibuster? Then it would SHOW the obstruction and might even make the news. What a dumbass!
Mitch was very smug on The News Hour last night and assured Gwen that next election cycle his side will still be in the upper 40’s, thereby also assuring/threatening more obstructionism post ‘08.
According to Mitch, the Republicans don’t obstruct the Dems bills, but “mold” them to be fair to everyone. Especially the corporations, but he didn’t say that.
A point that a lot of folks don’t seem to catch:
You don’t need to worry about vetoes, filibusters and cloture to NOT fund a war. You just don’t fund the war.
Doesn’t it kill you how strong and forthright the Republicans are as a minority? They have power and they use it. Compare and contrast with the Dems. What’s perversely hilarious is that the Dems are as powerless now as they were as the minority party. Clearly, Rove was right–the Republicans actually DID maintain control of both houses in 2006!
I bolted a few months ago.
-G
I still haven’t figured out why their obstructionism seems so much more effective than ours did when we were the minority. Or do you think it just “seemed more effective?”
Discipline
OT, but a bummer: Stewart and Colbert to return to air without writers.
Short and sweet! ‘I don’t belong to any organized party, I’m a Democrat!’ How profound… ;-)
Democrats make me very, very tired.
Jane:
…should be “unprecedented”
Sorry, my internal editor never sleeps.
I can hear the Republican response to that chart now:
Those Democrats will draw up anything on their Etch-A-Sketch, geesh.
Bottom line, half the Democrats support needless war with more troops and more wasted treasure than ever before. The Dem leadership makes excuses for genocidal loving GOPers and Blue Dogs with absolutely no support for sanity, reason, or the rule of law.
Maybe the airtime will give them a platform from which to publicize the strike. It sure isn’t getting MSM publicity.
Republic obstructionism seems so much more effective because of the people the Democrats have placed in leadership positions. They are effective hand-wringers but not effective leaders. One thing they may be leading effectively is the resurrection of a Republic majority.
Sen. Richard J. Durbin (Ill.), the Senate Democratic whip tasked with trying to find 60 votes for a filibuster-proof majority, acknowledged this week that Democrats’ biggest failure stemmed from expecting “more Republicans to take an independent stance” on Iraq. Instead, most of them stood with Bush.
A bit slow on the uptake, aren’t they?
But, now that Durbin and Nancy have had this long-overdue revelation, I’m sure that they’ll react appropriately and things will be different in 2008.
And Santa Claus will be bringing me a new bicycle for Christmas this year.
Of these things I’m sure.
Wonder when the Democratic leadership is going to understand the real Repug message of “Feck comity, and feck Democrats too!”?
Having real s-l-o-o-o-o-w learners as one’s Democratic leadership is a trial we shouldn’t have to endure.
Not a pony? ;-)
OfT - did anyone watch the NBC Nightly News tonight? Saw a commercial today that Brian Williams was gonna do an in-depth report on the War on Christmas.
Chee-ristamighty.
Not a pony? ;-)
that was last year.
Santa really likes me.
This speculation about a Bloomberg/Hagel third party run could perhaps be viable. Voters seem about equally pissed off by both the Democratics and Republicans. I would still vote Democratic, but its hard to argue that many Americans are very weary of the two parties who are now in power.
I expect what we get out of the Republicans, but my party seems to have forgotten what they were elected to do last year (to get the hell out if Iraq).
707! Or you’ve been very good…! 8-)
Rachel Maddow just discussing repub obstructionism & the dems with Bill Scher.
A huge difference between Republicans and Demos is that the GOP pays attention to its base. The Democratic party does not.
In reality both Pelosi and Reid are serving as representative of their very own narrowly-defined districts. Both enjoy the perks of their ‘other’ jobs as speaker and majority leader but neither have to provide much general Leadership there because no one outside Nevada or Pelosi’s district will provide direct meaningful “job feedback” to them.
How to influence them? Hmmmm, well getting “fired” means a move straight to K-street, and that’s no hardship even if they have to “wait” two years (uh-huh, anyone believe that’s gonna work?). So for them it’s win-win.
They get to play a “Leader” on TV but have to do nothing to make the name mean anyhting. They get to keep their jobs because as mad as we are at them, unless we can fund a viable candidate to run against them, we can’t directly affect their day jobs either.
but my party seems to have forgotten what they were elected to do last year (to get the hell out if Iraq).
Well, *they* are out of Iraq. I think they misunderstood the message. It needs to re-explained, I think, very sloooowly…
Did I mention that they’re not real quick on the uptake?
Exactly right and I am disgusted that Nancy would call us “advocates.” I am not - just a really ticked off Dem who would like to have about 30 minutes to talk face to face with these wimps.
That’s because when Dems pay attention to their base, it’s “catering to special interest groups.”
Republicans paying attention to their base is just “smart politicians paying attention to the silent majority of Middle America.”
Or you’ve been very good…! 8-)
One word: “Loopholes”.
Yeah, well, they’re scaring the hell out of me, that’s for sure. Nothing like ineffectiveness and not giving the public what they know they want to change the party. Maybe they’ll lose seats in the house, but gain in the Senate and the WH?
Speaking of not giving the voters what they want, I thought the President gave a press conference a couple of months ago and said that 3,800 troops were going to be pulled from Iraq by Christmas, with another apx. 20K by June. Why have we not heard a peep about troops coming home? As far as we know, is that still the plan? I know that it was primarily dictated by the rotation, but could anything have changed now that the WH has been allowed to convince a lot of people that the surge may be working? That, BTW, is why I can see why Dems thought the Rethugs would be more compliant and turn on Bush. If you’ll remember, after Warner and (was it?)Graham went to Bush to tell him the war sucks and they couldn’t support it anymore, and this made the news, it really did look like Repugs were starting to turn. Then they did an about face and landed up right back where they started once the surge was announced. Disgusting and immoral!
That’s right you’re a Lawyer! :P
Reid is not on our side, He is a pro-life Mormon from a red state, not someone in touch with thje progressive values we so highly regard.
He was chosen to replace Daschle because of Democratic fear and DLC type “accommodation.” It’s as if Dems were saying, “Please don’t hurt us, our leader is a pro life con just like you. See, we’re not really liberal so you can’t call us dirty names and beat us up.”
Doesn’t work every time.
Reid needs to be replaced and not just because he’s weak, He’s weak on purpose. If not then he must be challenged in his primary in ‘10, or even running a third party candidate against him. With a larger majority in the Senate I’d rather lose his seat than have him be the leader. Plus, he’s not very popular in his own state. Maybe folk in Nevada can tell a loser when they see one.
stupid questions…
1. how many of those cloture votes were preceeded by an objection to a unanimous consent request?
2) how many of those cloture votes were followed by 30 hours of debate?
3) how many periods of 30 hour debates were followed by a vote?
more questions:
4) what is the definition of a filibuster?
5) are all of those really filbusters?
Stupid answers… IRCC, none of the thirty hours of Debate occurred on 2 or 3…
Neither pelosi nor reid are real Dims; they are both DINOs. reid realized that he could move up faster as a Dim in NV, but only as he espoused the repug view quietly. pelosi just went from a real Dim in Baltimore to rich wife in SF where she had no chance as a repug. Her true colors showed as soon as impeachment went off the table. There was no such talk during the election cycle. Had she said that ahead of time, there would have not been any outpouring of support for the 06 elections.
Earlier today Conyers was interview along with Ray McGovern on DemocracyNow. When asked if he would support the impeachment bill, Conyers danced and sang. Ray McGovern said that he couldn’t understand Conyers’ position since Conyers had published a 300+ page report of why impeachment should be undertaken. Somebody got to Conyers in a big way. The Dims need to show some spine, but it is unlikely because this crew is really rethugs and the 06 election made no difference except to transfer the guilt to the Dems.
A Bloomberg/Hagel third party run could be viable only against a candidate like Hillary. The thing is they will paint her - somewhat accurately - as another Washington insider named Clinton. Bush, Clinton, Bush, Clinton, — had enough?
Against someone like Edwards, not so obviously partisan, not a current member of the government and with a genuine populist message calling on standing up to the entrenched powers a third party run would be marginal and take more from R’s then D’s.
If Reid would just ignore Lindsey Graham’s hold on the anti-torture bill, throw it out there, and force a *real* filibuster on the issue,
I’d forgive him,forgive a lot,quit hating him so much,be a lot happier, be pleased.This is comforting:
What Will Israel Do?
A unilateral military strike against Iran is much more likely following the latest intel report about Tehran’s nuke program.
http://www.newsweek.com/id/81215/
Like the War on Terra will soon be wrapped around the Dem Prez’s neck in ‘09…
Tic Toc Tic Toc Tic….Kablambo!!!! It’s comin’.
The procedures confuse me also; so using the “selise” method, I just down loaded the Congressional Research Service report on “Filibusters and Cloture in the Senate”..it’s about thirty pages of fine print..
Clearly, the Dems are taking the “If you can’t beat ‘em, join ‘em” road….how infuriating…The way they’re passing all of W’s bills so quickly…maybe they’ll have time for impeachment…Yeah, right. They have given up.
Turkey seems to like the unilateral military strike option too…
goopers treat with the respect they deserve– none.
we need to call bullsh-t on their crap. I do not understand why not a single national democrat is speaking out against the republicans in congress and their continiued blind support of the most incompetent and arrogant president ever. he only cares about rich people
Leaving Bushco to their own devices for the “remainder” of their term, will ensure that the Dems get blamed for any fuckery that happens.
OT..looks as if the media are taking a harder look at Obama..first the NYT and the “present votes” and now The Hill…
The Hill
when digby posted on this, i made some angry comments which i won’t repeat here… but for anyone who’s curious, here’s the link.
so our congressional leaders are now surprised that the Rs aren’t reciprocating in bipartisan compromise?
have we not been yelling this all year, or longer? have the Ds not ignored us except to tell us about how important it is to compromise (but the dems really mean capitulate) and bipartisan yada yada as excuses for not doing the work they promised?
bottom line, when the dems don’t bother to fight and then come complaining to us about those mean nasty Rs in order to get money (yes i got a fund raising letter based on this article) then i think that maybe the dems are loosing the battles (the ones they don’t bother to fight) on purpose. i really have no other way to explain it - other than to think the congressional dems are holding the country hostage. unless we all work our asses off in 2008 to help them get a bigger majority, they’re not going to do what they promised us they wanted to.
And Bush likes Turkey too. ;0)
well different people seem to have different ideas about when a filibuster “officially” starts.
for example, chris dodd was saying that his filibuster hadn’t officially started when reid pulled the bill.
by that definition, none of the items on the chart above are filibusters.
i really don’t care how we use the term - so long as we’re consistent. and i don’t think we doing that.
p.s. oh good, i’m glad you’re reading that! maybe we can compare notes later. *g*
America is a republic not a mobocracy. The reason the president has very low approval ratings is he is too liberal for us conservatives on the United States border amnesty issue. However, the Congress has even lower approval ratings because of their habit of redistributing workers’ and small business owners’ wealth to sloths and slackers!
I blame everything on Joe Lieberman.
OT..some good news:
dkos
Regarding a 3rd party bid for the White House, the problem has always been (if I understand things correctly) that in reality a 3rd party candidate really needs to win the majority of Electoral College votes outright, which isn’t very likely. Otherwise, without any candidate holding a majority (not a plurality), the election is tossed into the lap of the House of Representatives. Do you really see the House voting for an Independent over one of the major party candidates?
Seems we have a real live visiting troll?!!
Tweedledum and Tweedledee
Agreed to have a battle!
For Tweedledum said Tweedledee
Had spoiled his nice new rattle.
Just then flew down a monstrous crow,
As black as a tar-barrel!
Which frightened both the heroes so,
They quite forgot their quarrel.’
There have been a few today. That’s okay - we’re tough. :)
I don’t think a “Mr. Smith” type filibuster is possible with the 60 vote cloture rule. It looks as if the only tactic that works is for some brave Dem to object to the UC’s..every one. That would grind any legislation to a halt.
The reason the president has low approval ratings is because he suffers from low approval ratings.
I’m just lurking this evening but the troll illogic is more like sourgrapes over something personal. Think I’ll go back to lurking. Lots of good observations worth read…..
What the hell is wrong with “political arguments”? Last I checked, the Senate was a “political” institution, and Senators were “politicians”. Sheesh!
If enough people in enough states vote for a third party, that wouldn’t produce enough electoral votes? I’m certainly no expert on this matter.
oh, yeah - i agree.. the rules don’t appear to permit the old fashioned type of filibuster. but i don’t object if the term is used in a new way now…. just so long as we’re consistent.
and i’m really not convinced that a cloture vote should count as a filibuster. especially as dodd’s folks were explicitly using a different meaning.
Christy has a new post upstairs for those who don’t already know that.
I agree, If all of the alloted time for debate wasn’t used prior to the cloture vote..it doesn’t count on my score card.
It’s becoming more clear that the Democrats that were elected in 2006 weren’t as progressive as we thought they were. Sad. It’s not helping that the repukes are better at playing the political game. They’ve had a ton more years of experience in doing so. I effing hate them.
Impeach already! Want to send a message about smacking down obstructionism? Then start with Cheney, the lord of stubborness. There is plenty of evidence lying around to remove him from office. If the dems in leadership cared about the Constitution, separation of powers and the office of the President and the VP, then it is high time they did something about it.
When we saw pictures of the black smoke billowing out of the OEEO yesterday, my husband turned to me and said, ”Looks like the Devil, Cheney’s true master is paying him a visit.”
Perhaps filibusters that only exist on paper should be called filiblusters.
Keith is YAH! Let hope he covers the tapes
Where did you bolt to?
I really can’t figure out if they are stupid or if they are crafting a message that will appeal to what they consider to be a stupid audience.
They seem to have a genius for choosing the worst possible course politically. For example: Take the energy bill. Now, they were obviously desperate to pass something precisely because of the impression created by the obstructionism, that they can’t get anything done. But what did they do? They were so anxious to get something that Bush would sign and that the Republican’s wouldn’t filibuster, that they threw the Renewable stuff and the repeal of tax giveaways to oil under the bus. Wouldn’t it have been better to force the Republicans to do a real filibuster, talking for hours on the senate floor in defense of tax give aways to the oil companies and against renewable energy? Or better yet, let Bush veto it and run campaign ads against the failure to over-ride the veto. What the hell, we’ve had absolutely horrible energy policy for the past fifty years, whats one more year? When the alternative is a bill that does pretty much nothing but barely raise CAFE standards years from now, something that could just as easily be done next year as this year. It’s just crazy.
The point is that the Republicans have chosen to use obstructionism as a tactic. That is within their rights to do. There is no point in crying about that. Effective politics means recognizing what tactics the other side is using and devising a counter attack that uses their actions to our advantage. I see absolutely no effort to do this. Just a sort of stunned befuddlement. It’s truly mind boggling. It’s like a monkey playing checkers. Maybe they can pull off the first move and then after that…
First Pelosi, now Durbin miscalculating. That’s fine we all do it. But shouldn’t their miscalculation have become clear alot sooner than their end-of-year reflections. Like, maybe, by March wasn’t it clear that for the Republicans any semblance of cooperation was off the table?
What did the border ever do? Why does it need amnesty?
We Dems are trying to stop that. We don’t believe CEOs deserve all that money either.
Well that certainly explains why the Republicans in Congress have approval ratings in the low teens while the Democrats have approval ratings in the high thirties. Which averages out lower than Bush…but the Democrats (particularly rank-and-file) are higher than Bush.
So I would guess that the disgust is that those “sloths and slackers” are BIG BUSINESSES that are receiving massive Federal subsidies and military contracts for an unnecessary War brought forth on false grounds. That’s where the redistribution of “wealth” is going…UPWARD. Social Security is NOT the redistribution of wealth away from the workers. Health care programs are not the redistribution of wealth away from workers. Small businesses and the future workers in this country are the ones that are going to have to pay off those trillions in accrued Deficits and Debt generated by 6 years of Republican control of the Presidency (and longer for Congress).
Phony Inflation figures (extracting out fuel, utilities, tuition, rent increases, and ‘volatile’ food price increases while focussing upon things like Chinese imports) concealing the real cost of living.
Big Agribusiness that receives vast subsidies for NOT growing crops…or outright DESTROYING them.
Gasoline bills that have shot up 250% from the Clinton era. While Gas Company profits have skyrocketed to levels beyond comprehension every year!
Pharmaceutical “import protection” compelling those attempting to purchase generics and cheaper foreign substitutes to pay prices an order of magnitude higher than alternatives just across the border.
The dropping of regulations on mortgage lenders so that hundreds of thousands fueled a “housing bubble” that made the “Economy look Great” in terms of Construction employment, new home ‘ownership’ (hahahahahahah), and business growth in these subdivisions. Then the bubble burst, because the loans issued were ARM’s that should never have been issued. Result…the lie was exposed…the Economy was based on falsehoods and deceit. Foreign banks “owned” those homes. The foreclosures have started to have consequences that will not be gauged for generations. Homeless families, bankruptcies (under the new Bush “debt bondage” ACT ), people foregoing health insurance or paying college tuitions to make home payments, businesses shuttering up in former areas with vibrant growth.
Most of that is occurring in “Red Areas” (Central Valley of California, Orange and Riverside Counties, Florida, Ohio, Dallas-Fort Worth) in the vast suburban subdivisions where almost everybody bought into the Republican fantasy of “buy it on credit”.