Bayh's Defense Of Lieberman Wrong, Senate Expert Says

digg Share this on Facebook Huffpost - Bayh's Defense Of Lieberman Wrong, Senate Expert Says stumble reddit del.ico.us RSS


First Posted: 11-14-08 11:54 AM   |   Updated: 12-15-08 05:12 AM

I Like ItI Don’t Like It
Bayh

Appearing on "The Rachel Maddow Show" earlier this week, Indiana Sen. Evan Bayh argued that Connecticut Sen. Joe Lieberman should keep his committee chairmanships, suggesting that the posts could be taken away at a later date if he misbehaves. But a Senate rules expert who spoke to the Huffington Post said this could prove more difficult than is presently assumed.

Attempting to put Democrats' fears to rest, Bayh told Maddow:

And the final thing I'd say is, if he does retain his chairmanship, we still exert oversight over him and control over him. He doesn't have the ability to just do whatever he wants. The caucus still has the right to remove him from that position at any time if he starts going off on some kind of tangent.

Bayh's rationale appeared persuasive to some Democrats, including former Clinton campaign operative Phil Singer, who wrote on his blog that the Indiana Senator's take was "not unreasonable."

But former Democratic Senate staffer Martin Paone suggested Bayh is under-educated on this matter. Paone, who became as the "secretary to the majority" in the Senate starting in 2001, notes that Republicans harbored similar desires in the past, but never executed them due to the threat of a filibuster.

"It takes a Senate resolution to change a chairmanship, and that resolution could be subject to a filibuster," Paone told the Huffington Post. Put simply, under Bayh's proposed scenario, Republicans would have every reason to filibuster a new Senate resolution taking Lieberman's chairmanship away if he was proving an effective antagonist of President Obama.

Paone noted that a similar game of political chess played out in the Senate's recent history. "We had a similar situation in the past with a Republican moderate senator, Mark Hatfield from Oregon, who voted the wrong way in the eyes of [former Sen. Rick] Santorum and others on the constitutional amendment on a balanced budget," Paone said. "There were rumblings they wanted to take his chairmanship away. But the ranking member on the committee was [Democratic] Sen. Robert Byrd, who wrote Hatfield a nice note saying, 'if they ever try to take your chairmanship away, I'll make sure we [Democrats] will filibuster such a resolution."

According to Paone, "the time to take a chairmanship away is when everybody is being appointed [at the beginning of the new Congress]. Everybody has an investment in that resolution. In order for everybody to benefit, that resolution has to pass. It's much more difficult to cherry pick in this fashion, to take one Senator's chairmanship, at a later date."

Asked if Bayh understands this complexity, Paone said "I'm sure he probably doesn't. There aren't that many people up there who do. It's not every day you want to change a chairmanship. And since the Hatfield matter never materialized, I think that shows why it's not as easy as some might think."

Appearing on "The Rachel Maddow Show" earlier this week, Indiana Sen. Evan Bayh argued that Connecticut Sen. Joe Lieberman should keep his committee chairmanships, suggesting that the posts could be t...
Appearing on "The Rachel Maddow Show" earlier this week, Indiana Sen. Evan Bayh argued that Connecticut Sen. Joe Lieberman should keep his committee chairmanships, suggesting that the posts could be t...
Report Corrections
 
Comments
384
Pending Comments
0
iPhone App Promo

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

View Comments:
Page: « First ‹ Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next › Last » (15 pages total)

Why should a person who is not trustworthy be trusted?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:32 PM on 11/14/2008
- Big0725 I'm a Fan of Big0725 23 fans permalink
photo

Aye, now that's the rub!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:36 PM on 11/14/2008
- AllenD I'm a Fan of AllenD 36 fans permalink
photo

I laugh when the Pugs worry about Obama's ability to stand up to Harry Reid. Reid can't even stand up to Joe Lieberman.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:26 PM on 11/14/2008
- Big0725 I'm a Fan of Big0725 23 fans permalink
photo

Har har har

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:36 PM on 11/14/2008
- Big0725 I'm a Fan of Big0725 23 fans permalink
photo

Hey, if need be, I'm for a full evisceration of Senate seats. It's get right or get left. Turn or burn. If someone needs to have there perspective re-aligned, maybe a change in venue is due.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:20 PM on 11/14/2008
- bdaved I'm a Fan of bdaved 31 fans permalink

Senator Lieberman chose his actions and carried them out. If he didn't think they would have consequences, his imprudence makes him a poor choice for any important leadership positions.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:18 PM on 11/14/2008
photo

Sounds like he did't expect the outcome; if his BBF, McCain, had won, we would't be having this same conversation; He's be in his new office, as Secretary of State! Oh well, stuff happens Joe, deal with it; Blackmail is a really poor quality, in anyone!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:22 PM on 11/14/2008
- markkraft I'm a Fan of markkraft 15 fans permalink

What did Joe Lieberman do that Hillary Clinton didn't?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:19 PM on 11/14/2008
- bdaved I'm a Fan of bdaved 31 fans permalink

Senator Clinton aggressively campaigned for herself against Senator Obama, then campaigned actively for Senator Obama against Senator McCain. Senator Lieberman actively campaigned for Senator McCain against Senator Obama. He criticized Senator Obama at the Republan Convention, which is something Senator Clinton certainly didn't do, and which is kind of what the whole hoo-ha is about. I don't think a senator should be able to take that kind of action and expect their relationship with the party they caucus with to remain unchanged.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:56 PM on 11/15/2008
- begabug I'm a Fan of begabug 333 fans permalink
photo

sounds like the good people of connecticut will have to fix this problem much like the elctorate did in the case of georgie. damn, do we have to do everything?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:12 PM on 11/14/2008
- Big0725 I'm a Fan of Big0725 23 fans permalink
photo

Yes, we do. And, ya know, I'm starting to like the idea of politicians fearing us instead of us being afraid of them. Nothing makes a politician's butt pucker like an active and vociferous constituency.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:35 PM on 11/14/2008

I agree-- if the Democrats can't stand up to something this obvious how can we have any confidence they will have the backbone to stand up to a real challenge. They continue to sell their soul for the bashful promise of Lieberman possibly, maybe, if they're nice to him, voting in their favor in the future.

In the effort to be pragmatic they show no principles whatsoever.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:12 PM on 11/14/2008
- markkraft I'm a Fan of markkraft 15 fans permalink

Democrats are supposed to "stand up" for pushing independents towards the Republicans?

I'll sit down and let the experts deal with it in a calm, rational manner, thanks.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:18 PM on 11/14/2008
- Manx I'm a Fan of Manx 23 fans permalink

I think Senators Bayh, Dodd and others are presenting specious arguments in favor of retaining Lieberman as chairman of his committees. On Rachel Maddow's show, Sen. Bayh kept repeating the word, "revenge," as if holding Lieberman accountable for his outrageous behavior during the campaign is vindictive. Holding Lieberman accountable would be a common-sense, democratic procedure. It has nothing to do with "revenge."

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:02 PM on 11/14/2008
- roshni I'm a Fan of roshni 182 fans permalink

It's not revenge, it's accountability.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:16 PM on 11/14/2008
- Big0725 I'm a Fan of Big0725 23 fans permalink
photo

Screw it! I like revenge. Joe's a good J e w. He'll understand an eye for an eye!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:31 PM on 11/14/2008
- markkraft I'm a Fan of markkraft 15 fans permalink

Bayh is *STILL* right about this, regardless of what a former Senate staffer says.

This isn't about a theoretical Republican fillibuster or an equally theoretical need to strip Lieberman of his seat on a committee where the Democrats *ALREADY* have a majority! This is about whether Democrats want to weaken themselves before any of their legislation is passed. It's against the party's interests to turn Lieberman into a Republican martyr.

I am a progressive... but there's a difference between being progressive and being unwise. Obama has a laundry list of BIG legislation. National healthcare. Fixing the economy. Ending a war. Middle-class tax cuts. A historic shift towards green energy essential to preventing the worst effects of global warming...

HUGE THINGS THAT COULD SAVE LIVES... and we're debating whether Lieberman should be spanked, repackaging the desire for revenge as if he were an actual threat?! Politics of fear!

Remember how the Democrats had 57 seats in '92, but couldn't pass healthcare because of big money? Do any of you think BIG OIL is going to be silent as we adopt renewable energy? I don't! They will make it VERY difficult in states that produce coal and oil. We're going to need every vote we can get!

Now's not the time to burn bridges. Lieberman's toast in 2010 anyways!

Don't play into the Republican's hands! Save your powder for the big fights and keep your eyes on the prize... leave the small-time, petty divisiveness to the Republican Party!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:56 PM on 11/14/2008
- Big0725 I'm a Fan of Big0725 23 fans permalink
photo

It's namby-pamby, wishy-washy excuse making that got us into this mess. No one wants to rock the boat because they might, heaven forbid, upset a constituent. Well I hate to notify Mr. Reid, Bayh, Dodd and such that not only has the boat be rocked, it's taking on copious amounts of water.

Screw all you wishy-washy senators. Get right or face the wrath of a p!ssed off electorate!

BTW, in 92', wasn't Bush the 41st the President? Could that have had something with things not passing?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:29 PM on 11/14/2008
- markkraft I'm a Fan of markkraft 15 fans permalink

Bill Clinton won in '92, and took office in early '93 with 57 seats in the Senate... so when I was saying '92, I was referring to the election in which Clinton and new senators were elected.

... and just two years later, Republicans gained 54 seats in the house and 8 in the Senate, and the Democrats lost their chance to do anything sweeping for the rest of Clinton's presidency.

So, that's why I say, now is not the time to alienate anyone willing to support us, whether they are an independent or not. We need to come off as non-partisan and focused on the big things, otherwise we risk another Republican Revolution.

We've got a narrow window in which to make real, lasting systemic change. We shouldn't waste it on these sorts of petty squabbles.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:14 PM on 11/14/2008
- Doofus I'm a Fan of Doofus 25 fans permalink
photo

If Lieberman ends up being the pivotal '60th Democrat', he's going to occupy
a position of great power in the Senate. It will be *his* vote up or down that
would determine success or failure of a whole lot of legislation. Obviously,
we are seeing signs of that already, from Demo leadership making nice
with old Smokin' Joe.

The thing is, it WAS essential to count Lieberman as a Democrat so as to
maintain a 51 vote majority in the Senate, to control committees and the
drafting of legiislation (not that they were actually able to accomplish
much even WITH a majority - still far better to have one than not). That
in itself is no longer essential. He's outlived his usefulness.

It would be great to have a 60-vote majority, but interestingly enough it's
still less than the 2/3 majority require on the *really* important stuff. The
question must be, would Lieberman be a reliable, dependable 60th
Demo vote for those times when it was truly important, or would he
continue to 'do his own thing'?

The answer probably is: why would he NOT continue to be the free-spirited
loose canon he has been for the past year?

We can perhaps only hope the leadership has secured some sort of
'double-secret probation' promise to keep him on the straight & narrow.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:51 PM on 11/14/2008
- sposton I'm a Fan of sposton 203 fans permalink
photo

I've been supportive of moves that would punish Lieberman without pushing him completely. I've changed my mind - I say kick him out. Enough is enough.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:53 PM on 11/14/2008
photo

When it comes to Lieberman, it begins to feel like a Palin rally, why not the same for Bush. Identify all the vill ains. Don't let them escape.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:51 PM on 11/14/2008
- zest I'm a Fan of zest 20 fans permalink

Just to not have to hear him speak would be reward enough.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:42 PM on 11/14/2008
photo

He's a sore on America's side. I bet he's corrupt as you get. There is no other reason for his kind of behavior. Joe is probably expecting a pardon. His chairmanship is too powerful for him to chair. Please, go to this site to prevent the president from pardoning himself and all his cronies. Contact your congress people and senators.

http://democrats.com/pardon?cid=ZGVtczQwODczMmRlbXM=

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:41 PM on 11/14/2008

It would be a serious mistake for the Dems to keep Lieberman in the democrat caucus just for the seek of having a 60-majority. He is totally not trust worthy. No one can rely on him when it comes to a vote.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:40 PM on 11/14/2008

Besides, if the man has any integrity at all, he votes his conscience most of the time. After all, governance isn't a kids game, high matters of state are at stake. I've read that he votes almost exclusively as a progressive, except for matters of the middle east and war, if those votes mean anything to him he would do them no matter what.

What I'm trying to say is that the man will vote the right way even if he is demoted and leaves the caucus. Or, he will sh*t in his own ideological nest out of spite, and if he chose to do that, wtf, let your people see what he is.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:02 PM on 11/14/2008

Some of these Senators should take any leftover money they might have and buy themselves some backbone. If they don't have enough courage to stand up to Lieberman how can we as voters have any confidence that they can handle and have the courage to deal with the rest of the problems that need to be addressed at this time.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:30 PM on 11/14/2008
photo

Boot him while the booting's good.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:24 PM on 11/14/2008
Page: « First ‹ Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next › Last » (15 pages total)
Comments are closed for this entry

 You must be logged in to comment. Log in  or connect with 

Connect