Author's posts

Dec 21 2010

The Threat of the Centrists

In his blog commentary on Robert Kutner’s  excellent article Obama to blink first on Social Security, David Dayan (one of the better bloggers imho) adds a different perspective in what he opines may be another reason that the Obama administration will be embracing elements of the Obama created Bowles-Simpson debt commission;

I would add that the President may not just be pre-empting Paul Ryan with this move, but a bipartisan group of Senators who are basically carrying on the Catfood Commission after its demise.

It got me thinking: who are those Senators?

The group is led by Mark Warner (D-VA) and Saxby Chambliss (R-GA). As of last week on the floor of the Senate, the following senators professed to belong to the group:

Democrats

  • Jon Tester (D-MT)

  • Ron Wyden (D-OR)

  • Kay Hagan (D-NC)

  • Mark Udall (D-CO)

  • Michael Bennet (D-CO)

  • Jean Shaheen (D-NH)

  • Bill Nelson (D-FL)

  • Amy Klobuchar (D-MN)

  • Diane Feinstein (D-CA)

  • Mark Begich (D-AK)

Republicans

  • Roger Wicker (R-MS)

  • Mike Johanns (R-NE)

  • Mike Crapo (R-ID)

  • James Risch (R-ID)

  • Lamar Alexander (R-TN)

  • Bob Corker (R-TN)

It has been reported that there are two additional Republicans in the group, but it’s likely that all 47 Republicans in the 112th Senate will vote to gut social programs wherever they can. The threat really should be focused on the Democrats in the group.

Nov 05 2010

The 112th Congress: My Take

One of the problems, post-election, will be the Democrats’ reaction to the mid-term blowout. In past elections where Democrats have lost seats, there was a rush to emulate the conventional wisdom of why the other side prevailed. This time, aided by the corporate media that proclaims the country has moved solidly to the center- right, it is very conceivable that the Democrats will overreact to the small government, roll back spending, cut taxes, and reduce the deficit ‘mandate’ that the American people supposedly gave the Republicans in the recent election.

We all know that is nonsense. However, the Democratic Party has never been known to be the most astute when it comes to playing political hardball.

Aug 09 2010

On Electing More Democrats

This diary is nothing more than my opinion. If you are looking for links to follow, you might as well stop reading now.

We’ve all seen opinions expressed by those who are convinced that by electing more Democrats, the problem with advancing liberal (or ‘progressive’) legislation would be solved. Those opinions are typically based upon the procedural hurdle in Congress: 60 votes in the Senate to enact cloture and 218 votes in the House for a majority. I’ll call these folks the majority-first group. I suppose that if it were simply a matter of achieving said majority, their premise might be valid. The passage of PPACA (health insurance reform) is often cited as an example of ‘landmark’ legislation under this scenario, although it would be disingenuous to label the legislation as liberal or even progressive. How many times were we led to believe by the President, the Speaker of the House, and the Majority Leader in the senate that the PPACA legislation would include a hugely popular public option, only to see it stripped so that we could get a ‘majority’ to vote for the bill?