Connecticut Politics and Elections: Coverage, Analysis, Maps and Commentary
What does everyone think, can we count on Joe Lieberman to help stop Alito?The Gang of 14 can be found here:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gang_of_14Byrd, Lieberman, Inouye, Landrieu, Nelson, Pryor and Salazar on our side, McCain, Warner, Graham, Snowe, Collins, Chafee and DeWine on theirs. DeWine is already on the record that he doesn't think Alito meets the "extraordinary circumstances" test.
I think Lieberman will not support a filibuster. Possibly because he is intelligent. He does not want to render the Democratic minority completely irrelevant, which a filibuster would most certainly do. Either popular sentiment against the ridiculous gridlock or the nuclear option would end the ability of the Democrats in the Senate to do anything at all.
Quinn's right. The real question is whether the gang of 14 can hold together. If DeWine is already breaking off, it's hard to believe they will all vote as a block for either the filibuster (and no to the nuke option) or to confirm/reject Alito. If some of the D's want to filibuster, and the R's don't support them, the nuclear option goes on the table, and the Rules get changed. Then it's bye bye influence. The only good that might come out of that is to see real filibuster, when a senator takes the floor and then doesn't give it up. The Rule change that created the cloture vote made the threat of filibusters too easy. Give me the drama of someone reading from the phone book to hold up action.
On campaign finance reform:Call, call, call....Senate Democrats(860)240-8600 or (800)842-1420Senate Republicans(860)240-8800 or (800)842-1421House Democrats(860) 240-8585 or (800)842-8267House Republicans(860)240-8787 or (800)842-8270On "relevance" and whether Dems will stand up and filibuster:There is nothing more irrelevant and pathetic than a minority party that cringes and capitulates to the majority party.
There is nothing more irrelevant and pathetic than a minority party that cringes and capitulates to the majority party.Bingo. The standard complaint against Democrats in the past five years has been a complaint of no spine. Where are the Dems standing up for what's right?The filibuster is exactly that stance. I think a filibuster will excite the Dems and independants toward a sweeping Dem victory in 06, particularly if the GOP changes Rules to neuter the filibuster.
This "reform" package is a pig in a poke, sad to say.The stated problem is supposedly improper influence on policymaking. So peel back the onion on this reform bill:Lobbyists, solely because of the work they do, are now denied the right to fully participate in the election of their leaders. Okay...Party bosses (be they legislative leaders who control their PACS or party chairpersons) have their hands STRENGTHENED by the retention of their PACs. (I don't care what the bill might say about PACs being phased out... if the will doesn't exist to get rid of them NOW then the will never go away at the hand of a future legislature.)Unions: My Dad was in a union, and I had the life I had because of the benefits his union fought for, but their hand is strengthened, too. They can still deploy vanloads of "volunteers" for a campaign, and run those phonebanks to their members.Stronger party bosses; stronger union influence; browbeating by the political columnists... and the taxpayer foots the bill.This is the throwback law of a lifetime... and it will be passed by the "reformers." Brilliant! So go ahead and call... But please don't call it reform.
Post a Comment