Dodd not only must keep every Democratic vote on his side but also is under pressure to find common ground with Republicans. It’s practical as well as political pressure. Democrats on his committee are suffering what’s being described as “partisan fatigue” from the health care debate and have urged Dodd to report a bipartisan bill out of the Banking Committee, insiders say.
After all that’s happened this year, the Democrats still don’t get it? There will be no “bipartisan bill” passed as long as the Democrats remain in control — not on healthcare, not on financial reform, not on the environment, not on anything whatsoever. Republicans are opposing — en masse — any bill with a Democratic sponsor. It has nothing necessarily to do with policy disagreements, it’s simply a calculated scorched-earth strategy that they think will win them control of Congress.
In one respect, I agree with the Democrats pressuring Dodd: I have “partisan fatigue” too, and I desperately wish Washington would return to being a place where legislators work to find agreement on important policy issues for the good of the country. But I also know that we need to face facts. In the face of the GOP’s obstruction strategy, that simply isn’t a possibility, and it’s time to stop pretending that it is.
Democrats need to rethink their entire approach to legislation. They need to give up on the idea that it is possible to craft bills that will get bipartisan buy-in. Once again, it doesn’t matter in the least what kind of bills they draft — they will not get any Republican support.
All the Democrats are doing by trying to craft a bipartisan bill is setting themselves up for failure. As long as they keep trying to gain Republican support, they will look like do-nothing failures, when in reality it is Republicans who are now so uninterested in legislating that they may as well just stay home. Until Republicans decide to get back to their jobs, Democrats should forget that the GOP even exists, and go about the task of running the country on their own.
They have not misunderstood anything. They simply don't like being on the hook for something all by themselves. Nobody has ever cared about bipartisanship, they have cared about having cover.
You're assuming all Democrats are actually progressive. I happen to believe that most efforts of 'bipartisanship' are nothing more than camouflage for acting in the interests of big corporate campaign donors. Just as with the phenomenon of the RINO, we now have to be on the lookout for the DINO - a Democrat opportunistically getting into office by appealing to a progressive constituency, only to pursue an agenda dictated by lobbyists.
Who's being naive?
Both the above comments are spot on. There are a lot of dems out there from conservative districts that don't consider themselves progressive at all. You can call them blue dogs, dlc's or dino's but they are there and they were what gave their party majority status. Now they are being asked to sign off on ultra-progressive legislation without the ability to even see it first in some cases (Dick Durbin said he still hasn't seen the Health Care Legislation that Harry is having scored - no that he's anything but progressive), they are getting more calls then they've ever had in their life and they are probably sick of towing the line on crap they don't really believe nor want to own in the next election. (Notice the rash of Dem retirements?) Asking for a "bi-partisan" solution may in fact be their way of asking their leadership to start heading for the center if they want to hold Congress (with a capital "C").
Maybe it is time for the revolution. The Democrats have the US military, the Republicans have the tea baggers and the unorganized militia. Guess who wins.
You really think the Dems have the US military?
Only those that are not prepared to commit treason. If you can identify any treasonous members of the military please identify them or continue supporting the enemies of this country and our constitution, your choice.
If it weren't for republican leaders making, or at least not objecting to, comments regarding armed rebellion from the right - this thread would be almost humorous. But it's really not paranoid to be concerned about more crazed right wingers thinking it's patriotic to gun down the liberals- i..e. kids singing songs in a Unitarian church.
Right. Yet it was a guy named BPDem that brought it up. I suppose you've forgotten all about the funny jesusland maps that circulated during the Bush years. Maybe it isn't so far fetched to think some anti-war nut will start executing soldiers in a mess hall.
You don't understand a thing, do you? Please look up the term "Commander in Chief"
Everytime you write something you give me hope that you are as representative of your people as you think you are. Please don't ever stop.
Loj, you're being naive. The right (as extensions of corporate America) own the military.
They simply don't like being on the hook for something all by themselves.
KH nailed it. This healthcare bill will be entirely on the backs of Democrats, and they really don't like that.
11 months until election…..
This healthcare bill will be entirely on the backs of Democrats
Even though the Democratic party capitulated on every Republican wish and desire. No public option, no expansion of Medicare, higher costs for the elderly and those with pre-existing conditions, no competition for Health Insurance industry. It's time to kill this horrible bill and take it through the legislative process via reconciliation. Oh yeah, and throw the traitorous fucker Leiberman out of the party and see how much his buddy's in the GOP want to rub his back. Make Leiberman an example and see what the rest of the spineless Blue Dogs think of working with GOP. The time for rainbows and unicorns is over. It's time to start busting heads.
Don't blame republicans for this, their's arent the votes your leadership neeed to buy off to get this far. You have 60 in your caucus that could pass anything they wanted to, do it it or go nuclear. Where do All and Amy stand on that option? Has their ever been such a passive aggressive majority party?
About the orig post- I agree with Jeff that any effort towards bipartisan agreement is a waste of time. Its better politics and policy to keeping repeating the obvious; that repubs have no interest in addressing the country's huge challenges (which they largely caused during the Bush admin.)
What's needed is a new term: "intraparty legislation" which will require about 85% support from the dems in each chamber to pass. Given the dumb rules of the senate it will also require the dem caucus there to agree to 100% unity on cloture votes (which at this point seems highly unlikely.)
2 quick comments.
1. I think the dems having all the right head counts in congress is actually hurting them.
2. You mention that you wish DC would "return to being a place where legislators work to find agreement on important policy issues". I'm wondering when you are referring to. Also, not everyone thinks the issues at hand are all that important; nor that they are the job of the federal governement. It's not exactly like deciding to go into Afganistan in 2001.
The time when " legislators worked to find agreement on important policy issues" was not that long ago. When GWB was pres and there were republican majorities, the dems were not in unanimous opposition to nearly every bill. Recall how T. Kennedy helped pass NCLB (what a mistake that unfunded mandate was!) Bush also had some dem support for his deficit exploding tax cuts and medicare part D.
You send Al Franken to DC and then bitch at us about not being bipartisan.
Seeing that Franken has worked on bills with Republicans your post reeks of BS.
Exactly!
Exactly wrong (as usual) DtM. See my response below.
When you have Democrats arguing that Franken is working with Republicans…then you really do live in a world where facts don't matter. The guy got totally burned by Thune the other day…losing arguments to Republicans, is that what you call working with us?
When you have Democrats arguing that Franken is working with Republicans
Well, thanks to local Republicans, he hasn't been there very long but I do know that last month he introduced The Justice for Survivors of Sexual Assault Act that was co-sponsored by Republicans Orrin Hatch of Utah and Chuck Grassley of Iowa. Two outspoken partisans against Health reform, yet, Franken got them to co-sponsor his bill. What a partisan hack.
His first piece of legislation was the Service Dogs for Veterans Act (S. 1495), which he co-authored with Republican Johnny Isakson. He also has a pending piece of legislation he's co-sponsored with Olympia Snowe- Republican.
And lets not forget Senate Amendment 2588 to the Defense Appropriations Bill which basically would withhold defense contracts from companies if they restrict their employees from taking workplace sexual assault, battery and discrimination cases to court. What Republicans supported this? These guys: Voinivich, Grassley, Hatch, Collins, Hutchinson, Alexander, LeMueix, Lugar and Bennett.
http://senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists...
As to Thune, he was telling half a story, like Republicans habitually do, and Franken was correct and factual that some benefits kick in immediately. The irony is that the Republicans have nothing to offer so their plans benefits would kick in - never.
Stop listening to Rush, Beck and O'Reilly for information. You'll only grow dumber and embarass yourself when you parrot that tripe.
Franken was correct and factual that some benefits kick in immediately
I believe that Franken said "a large majority" of the benefits kick in immediately. 1%. Large majority. 1%. Franken was embellishing at best, lying at worst.
Listen, I want to give Franken and chance, and episodes where he "embellishes" and blathers like he did on the clip fortunately have been few and far between. If that is a random occurance, he'll still have my support. If he does that type of thing weekly, he'll lose it. Simple as that.
I'm the first to say that I'm embarrassed by Michelle Bachmann. El Tinklenberg would have been a huge improvement. I won't be afraid to use the same lens to judge Franken.
You are spot on, absolutely correct. The only option left open to Democrats is to let the bills fail, then let Republicans get the blame for the results — who will people blame when they can not get health insurance, when it costs them an extraordinary amount? It is time to call their bluff, and let the American people decide whether they truly want to live under Ayn Rand, or under American democracy.
Sounds good to me. What your saying is, leave it up to the people. What a concept! Unfortunately, I still believe they will pass a bill. It may not have a public option or expanded Medicare enrollment, but it will still be an intrusion of big government into the lives of everyday Americans. I can't figure out how the Democratic party can virtually take power in America by sweeping elections, and then throw it all away in the first year. They're like a bunch of kids in an unattended candy store. Problem is, the candy store owners are going to come back and find them all with their pockets full. The ultra progressives are out of control and we can only hope that all who fell for the last campaign sham will turn things around soon.
Actually, today and historically, the Democrats have won sweeping elections and majorities after Republicans have screwed this country up. Republicans win big when economic issues are not a concern- in other words, after Democrats have fix things and put to rest the economic fears, Republicans win by running on less taxes and government. Its a nutty circle. When less taxes and government fail, The American people elect Democrats to fix things and provide government relief.
This cycle will be the same.
CMan, you do not understand what I said. I assume you are a Republican, because that seems to be their forte.
It is abunduntly clear Republicans refuse to compromise whatsoever — not a penny, not a smidgeon, not an iota, not one bit. The American people will surely punish them — - because we have to compromise every single day!!!!
What planet you from, Jim?
With all the corporate money behind them, the Right will succeed in blaming the dems for it. It doesn't matter that it's not true. When did the truth ever mean anything to the right?
just testing that i can post here before i type up a doozy of a reply in another thread. figured id leave my annoying test post in the thread at the bottom of the main page
The declaration of independence was posted here on this site. Go back and read it. As for the constitution, if the political class were willing to uphold it then so many people wouldn't be so willing to openly talk about revolution and secession.
Or some psycho gunning down cops in Pittsburgh
or some psycho killing a doctor for performing LEGAL operations
or some psycho gunning down people in a CHURCH because the church teachings were too liberal.
OK. I'll save this little thread and pull it out next November. We'll see who's right. Actually, we will probably know next summer. You missed my point. Had Obama come into office and been another Bill Clinton, and governed by polls, he could have slowly but surely started to implement his agenda. After eight years, he probably could have had the country running under his vision. But, instead, he came in as an ultra progressive with both guns blazing, and now both Republicans and Democrats aren't happy with him. I guess you just over did it with the love and adoration. He thought he was the new leeeeader of the woooorld with the "nothin's gonna stop us now" mentality. Turns out that was a miscalculation.
OK. I'll save this little thread and pull it out next November. We'll see who's right. Actually, we will probably know next summer. You missed my point. Had Obama come into office and been another Bill Clinton, and governed by polls, he could have slowly but surely started to implement his agenda. After eight years, he probably could have had the country running under his vision. But, instead, he came in as an ultra progressive with both guns blazing, and now both Republicans and Democrats aren't happy with him. I guess you just over did it with the love and adoration. He thought he was the new leeeeader of the woooorld with the "nothin's gonna stop us now" mentality. Turns out that was a miscalculation.
another Bill Clinton, and governed by polls, he could have slowly but surely started to implement his agenda.
What? Fail at health reform and then lose the Senate and House after they had 40 year run? Allow the rise of extremists like Gingrich and DeLay?
No thanks.
OK. Just a suggestion. But it doesn't look like the, "I'm President Obama and we are now Socialists" is working either.
A one time thing? Sorry DtM!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hVRp52op918