Slaying the Dinosaur: Young New England Democrat Tried to Kill Filibuster Once and for All

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Now there's a senator I can agree with -- a young New England Democrat who realizes that the filibuster is an institutional menace. He not only calls the parliamentary maneuver "a dinosaur" that had become "a symbol of a lot that ails Washington today," he actually took steps to kill the filibuster once and for all. The senator is Joe Lieberman ... in 1994.

At the time, Lieberman, part of a Democratic minority, believed Senate obstructionism had gone too far. Even though Republicans had the majority, he and Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) decided to take the bold step of pushing for majority rule in the Senate -- even if it made it easier for the new GOP-led chamber to pass legislation. At a press conference 15 years ago next month, Lieberman argued:

"[People] are fed up -- frustrated and fed up and angry about the way in which our government does not work, about the way in which we come down here and get into a lot of political games and seem to -- partisan tugs of war and forget why we're here, which is to serve the American people. And I think the filibuster has become not only in reality an obstacle to accomplishment here, but it also a symbol of a lot that ails Washington today.

"But I do want to say that the Republicans were not the only perpetrators of filibuster gridlock, there were occasions when Democrats did it as well. And the long and the short of it is that the abuse of the filibuster was bipartisan and so its demise should be bipartisan as well.

"The whole process of individual senators being able to hold up legislation, which in a sense is an extension of the filibuster because the hold has been understood in one way to be a threat to filibuster -- it's just unfair.

"I'm very proud to be standing here with Tom as two Democrats saying that we're going to begin this fight, because we've just been stung by the filibuster for a period of years, and even though the tables have now turned, it doesn't make it right for us to use this instrument that we so vilified."

In 1994, when Lieberman thought filibusters had become an outrageous abuse worthy of elimination, there were 39 cloture motions filed. Last year, there were 139. This year, Senate Republicans will likely break their own record.

And Lieberman this week threatened to help them, by opposing a vote on a once-in-a-generation opportunity at health care reform if it includes a provision to let some consumer choose between competing public and private health plans.

One wonders what Lieberman '94 would think of Lieberman '09.

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/

[Pooky 3,930]

What he'd say is that "With experience comes wisdom."

The check is there for a reason. It has served both Democrats and Republicans in the past and will continue to do so in the future. Changing the rules to suit partisan ends never leaves anything but a sour taste in the mouth. Just look at the new Senator for Massachusetts and how the Democrats changed the rules, then changed them back, to suit their own partisan ends. Politics should not be treated like a game, where if you change the rules if you don't like them.

Edited October 30, 2009 by Pooky

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Joe was young once?

So much for that filibuster proof majority!

Lieberman Marching Further Right in 2010

Sounding more like an independent than a Democrat, Sen. Joe Lieberman, I-Conn., tells ABC News he will campaign for some Republican candidates during the 2010 midterm elections and may not seek the Democratic Senate nomination when he runs for re-election in 2012.

"I probably will support some Republican candidates for Congress or Senate in the election in 2010. I'm going to call them as I see them," Lieberman said in an ABC News "Subway Series" interview aboard the U.S. Capitol Subway System.

Lieberman infuriated fellow Democrats in 2008 by supporting Republican presidential nominee John McCain as well as congressional candidates Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, and Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y.

The moves nearly cost Lieberman his chairmanship of the Homeland Security Committee, but after promising to be a loyal Democrat he was allowed to keep his gavel.

Now, he says he'll do it again.

"There's a hard core of partisan, passionate, hardcore Republicans," Lieberman said. "There's a hard core of partisan Democrats on the other side. And in between is the larger group, which is people who really want to see the right thing done, or want something good done for this country and them -- and that means, sometimes, the better choice is somebody who's not a Democrat."

Asked if he will seek the Democratic nomination when he runs for re-election in 2012, Lieberman said, "That's an open question."

"There are options," Lieberman said. "The other, obviously, is to just start as an independent, which is where I ended up in 2006."

He finds being an independent "liberating" because, "You're not tied to a particular inner group and feel that extra pressure to march in lockstep. I think that the public generally is fed up with all the partisanship, and us against them."

*****

In the Senate, Lieberman again has angered Democrats by saying he is adamantly opposed to including a so-called "public option" in the current health care reform bill.

Asked if he would go so far as to "join a Republican filibuster against the entire health bill" if the public option is included, Lieberman said, "Yes, that's right."

"Bottom line," he added, "I'm saying this public option is so unnecessary to genuine health care reform and so bad for our country and the people of our country that I would vote to stop final vote on this health care reform bill if the public option is part of it."

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/independent...tory?id=8952240

[natty bumppo 297]

yea I remember young joe ... I even remember ella grasso ... ...

your point is?

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

There's always some among the party with a majority that talk about putting away with the filibuster. The GOP did that when the Democrats blocked their nominees and whatnot and now the Democrats are doing the talk 'cause they can't get their shite through the Senate. Not gonna happen. Even if it was, there's not even a majority of Democrats to be had for meaningful health care reform. What good would it do? Watch them all fold on this initiative when they misread the results next Tuesday. It's a fact of life that we're run by corporate America. The people matter not at all.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

There's always some among the party with a majority that talk about putting away with the filibuster. The GOP did that when the Democrats blocked their nominees and whatnot and now the Democrats are doing the talk 'cause they can't get their shite through the Senate. Not gonna happen. Even if it was, there's not even a majority of Democrats to be had for meaningful health care reform. What good would it do? Watch them all fold on this initiative when they misread the results next Tuesday. It's a fact of life that we're run by corporate America. The people matter not at all.

Those Blue Dogs better realize that this won't just cost the Democratic Party, but they'll face a contested re-election - the ones who don't vote for cloture.

[Nikita2Charles 33]

Blue Dog Democrat?

Are they really DEMOCRATS?

OR should I call them OPORTUNISTIC ** DISGUISED as Democrat.

YOu have a Democratic President with AN AGENDA that THE PEOPLE voted for CHANGE and THOSE MONEY HUNGRY POLITICIAN let corporate American and Greed take the Best out of them. Instead of doing their JOB they are worring about next election.

With so much Majority on hand, WHY ON EARTH THEY KEEP GOING AT REPUBLICAN BIPARTISAN when the REPUBLICAN WILL ALWAYS SAY NO< NO NO Like a CRYING BABY WITH TANTRUM trying to create Division so they can get a chance at the next election. IF PEOPLE SEE THEY STAND FOR PRINCIPLE THEY WILL VOTE FOR THEM. EVEN MYSELF I HAVE VOTED FOR SOME REPUBLICAN IN LOCAL RACE WHEN I FEEL THE DEMOCRAT CANDIDATE DIDN"T FIT

IF THE DEMOCRAT LOSE THE MAJORITY< THEY ONLY HAVE THEMSELVES TO BLAME. IF YOU DON"T HAVE UNITY AMONG YOURSELF HOW CAN YOU MANAGE

Edited October 31, 2009 by Nikita2Charles

[Ban Hammer 14,665]

even when the republicans are a minority, it's still their fault

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

even when the republicans are a minority, it's still their fault

It isn't. This mess is owned by the Democrats alone.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

even when the republicans are a minority, it's still their fault

It isn't. This mess is owned by the Democrats alone.

I am starting to like this guy! Where is the (+) and (-) on the posts?