Picking our fights
As Democrats, we are in the opposition, and as such, the Republicans can easily muster a majority for any legislation they want to pass, except for one thing. Democrats can filibuster and hold firm unless the Republicans can muster 60 votes to cut off debate.
I firmly believe that it's only for two more years. Hubris has already begun to set in, and two years from now, the Republicans will lose a few seats. Remember that a lot of the races this time around were uphill battles and all five seats they gained in the House were because of the redistricting in Texas.
Historically, Republicans have been a lot better at getting everyone to march in lockstep. In the House, Tom DeLay genuinely inspires fear. He has additional clout because a lot of members owe him for money he has raised for them or for seats he Gerrymandered for them. The Senate is a different story, as Senators need to represent an entire state, rather than a district. Districts tend to be heavily Gerrymandered, which means that reps tend to be more partisan (and more shrill), while the Senators tend to be more moderate.
However, for really important votes, the Senate Whip (Dick Durbin, D-Illinois) can get everyone in line to hold the fort for really important legislation and confirmations. We can't do this with every bill, expenditure or confirmation, because filibustering everything looks like whining. And there is the cost of political capital, because there is a lot of horse-trading to get everyone to hold tight.
So what fights do we pick? The issues have to be important to people and politically popular. We need to make sure that we can hold 41 of our 45 Senators to refuse to cut off debate.
My vote goes to two key votes in the Senate, mainly because the House is a lost cause for the moment.
First, we have to bounce Alberto Gonzales. Torture is wrong, he condoned it, and we need to hit the Republicans hard with this. Even if he ultimately becomes Attorney General, he needs to be damaged goods so he can't be put on the Supreme Court. The Democrats on the committee voted unanimously against him (including Durbin.) We need to hold the line on this one.
Second is Social Security. People need to be aware that this can't be hurt and benefits can't be cut. It's simple. Figure out how much the corporate portion of FICA needs to go up to cover it (it's probably ridiculously small) and propose raising it. (Figuring it out involves a whole lot of actuarial assumptions, and I really can't find out what they are. However, that's why they pay the pointy heads at the CBO the big bucks.) Lieberman (yes, Lieberman) put it very well on the Daily Show last week when he said (paraphrasing) not to mess with the system, but if you want to give people the means to save extra, do it in addition to the existing system. (My first thoughts were "What a great idea! You could call it a 401K!," but I realize that there are a lot of options here. Anyway, the fainthearted faction seems to dissolve as soon as the pressure goes on.
We can win both of these votes, and we must. And if anyone else has any ideas about legislation or appointment confirmations that meet this moral-equivalent-of-war test, I'd love to hear them.
I firmly believe that it's only for two more years. Hubris has already begun to set in, and two years from now, the Republicans will lose a few seats. Remember that a lot of the races this time around were uphill battles and all five seats they gained in the House were because of the redistricting in Texas.
Historically, Republicans have been a lot better at getting everyone to march in lockstep. In the House, Tom DeLay genuinely inspires fear. He has additional clout because a lot of members owe him for money he has raised for them or for seats he Gerrymandered for them. The Senate is a different story, as Senators need to represent an entire state, rather than a district. Districts tend to be heavily Gerrymandered, which means that reps tend to be more partisan (and more shrill), while the Senators tend to be more moderate.
However, for really important votes, the Senate Whip (Dick Durbin, D-Illinois) can get everyone in line to hold the fort for really important legislation and confirmations. We can't do this with every bill, expenditure or confirmation, because filibustering everything looks like whining. And there is the cost of political capital, because there is a lot of horse-trading to get everyone to hold tight.
So what fights do we pick? The issues have to be important to people and politically popular. We need to make sure that we can hold 41 of our 45 Senators to refuse to cut off debate.
My vote goes to two key votes in the Senate, mainly because the House is a lost cause for the moment.
First, we have to bounce Alberto Gonzales. Torture is wrong, he condoned it, and we need to hit the Republicans hard with this. Even if he ultimately becomes Attorney General, he needs to be damaged goods so he can't be put on the Supreme Court. The Democrats on the committee voted unanimously against him (including Durbin.) We need to hold the line on this one.
Second is Social Security. People need to be aware that this can't be hurt and benefits can't be cut. It's simple. Figure out how much the corporate portion of FICA needs to go up to cover it (it's probably ridiculously small) and propose raising it. (Figuring it out involves a whole lot of actuarial assumptions, and I really can't find out what they are. However, that's why they pay the pointy heads at the CBO the big bucks.) Lieberman (yes, Lieberman) put it very well on the Daily Show last week when he said (paraphrasing) not to mess with the system, but if you want to give people the means to save extra, do it in addition to the existing system. (My first thoughts were "What a great idea! You could call it a 401K!," but I realize that there are a lot of options here. Anyway, the fainthearted faction seems to dissolve as soon as the pressure goes on.
We can win both of these votes, and we must. And if anyone else has any ideas about legislation or appointment confirmations that meet this moral-equivalent-of-war test, I'd love to hear them.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home