Last month, the Pew Research Center released a poll that found that only 26 percent of respondents know that 60 votes are required to break a filibuster. No wonder Democratic complaints about Republican obstructionists have thus far failed to catch fire. It's just not all that easy to have a national conversation on the topic when three fourths of the country is in the dark about the process.
But all of that can change after today.
Congress Daily reports that Sen. Richard Shelby (R-AL) has placed a "blanket hold" on at least 70 of President Obama's nominations until he receives over $40 billion worth of earmarks for his state.
This is unconscionably outrageous. If it were occurring anywhere else but the Senate chamber it would be extortion. A felony. It is an egregious misuse of minority power, easily the most flagrant example in years.
Democrats now have an easy opportunity to pick a national fight with the Republican party. It may be tough to engage the American public in a conversation about filibuster reform, but it should take little effort to build a national consensus around the basic proposition that a single senator should not hold the federal government hostage in exchange for an earmark. That the national interest should not be jeopardized for the benefit of a single state.
Shelby offers the perfect opening for Democrats. It's not clear yet which specific nominations are being held up, but as that information comes to light, we will undoubtedly find that many, if not most are nominees for indisputably critical positions in a wide variety of fields, perhaps including national security.
The Democrats should move swiftly to elevate Shelby, defining him as one of the leading voices of the Republican party. That shouldn't be a hard sell; he's the ranking member of the Banking Committee as well as a senior member of the Appropriations Committee. President Obama should then address the issue directly, demanding that Sen. Shelby back down. He must refuse to give into Shelby's demands, no matter the circumstances. And he should use the issue to define the dangers of Republican obstruction in a way that is easy for everyday Americans to understand.
But he should do more than just that. President Obama should call out the Republican leadership, as well. A hold in the Senate only has real force because it is presumed to have the support of the minority party. Unless the GOP quickly denounces Shelby's action, it will be fair to assume that every member of the Republican caucus supports it.
The president couldn't have asked for an easier fight to pick. Sen. Shelby is now the symbol of Republican obstruction. He is the symbol of the toxicity that has invaded the Senate and threatened the government's ability to function.
What he has done is easy to understand and impossible to justify. For a badly bruised Democratic party, that may be just what the doctor ordered.
Follow Dylan Loewe on Twitter: www.twitter.com/dylanloewe
And to make matters worse, Democrats led by those greedy senators from Nebraska and Louisiana, did their own extortion, demanding govt funds in exchange for their health care votes. so it would be hard for the Democrats to pursue sainthood when their very own hands are dirty.
It takes 67 votes to change Senate rules including of course changing the filibuster rule.
There is a so called Nuclear Option. It works like this. Every two years when a new group of Senators are sworn in, the President of the Senate, which is the Vice-President, can declare all previous Senate rules void and start over. The next time this could occure is AFTER the 2010 elections, when the Dems may not control the Senate. And even if they do, there is no doubt that the next time the GOP controls the Senate, and has a Vice-President, they could do the same thing.
Dick Cheney threatened to do this but did not. If Dick Cheney thought the Nuclear Option was too dangerous to use that tells you something.
Dems used the filibuster many times when Bush was President and were very glad they had this rule.
What happens the next time the GOP controls the Senate if there was no filibuster?
That is the beauty of the filibuster: It works both ways to give cover for those seeking reelection.
However, it also shines the harsh light of day on the true nature of what is happening in the Senate, and thus removes the cover for those up for reelection.
It could be disastrous in the short term, but it would allow the minority party to get some coverage, and perhaps some time to mobilize public opinion. If it were actually required, instead of this "a threat is as good as the promise" BS.
It has all become posturing for the soundbite, and no real work is happening.
It is undeniable that politicians in Washington D.C. have been bought and sold for years by financial lobbyists in favor of Wall Street's interests at the expense of U.S. tax payers for many generations to come.
A most glaring abdication of duty by U.S. politicians indeed! (i.e.,.Paulson, Richard Shelby, Chris Dodd, Barney Frank, Geitner, Bernake, and both the Clinton and Bush Administrations, etc...).
One must ask the question who was responsible for supervising and overseeing the behavior of AIG and Wall St. firms while U.S. politicians basically rolled the dice in providing subsidized housing (i.e., Fannie/Freddie via Clinton's State of the Union Address)?
From the U.S. tax payer viewpoint, the actions of U.S. politicians and Wall St. are totally indefensible and is the apotheosis of utter incompetence, greed, arrogance!
The smell of this egregious behavior by the U.S. permeates from Shanghai to Dubai!
i often try to make the argument adam smith -- who is supposed to be the father of capitalism was a moralist -- ie "the invisible hand". he wasn't a corporatist. sadly the american education system has dumbed people down far enough unless you are "elite" they just don't get it. and because you are "elite" they have been taught to want your head on a spit instead of realizing you are trying to work with them.
the only place i question your argument is freddy/fannie were set up to deal in subprime mortgages. that was their job. how and why the "too big to fail" set were allowed to play in subprime markets is criminal. its bigger fraud than any other ponzi out there.
How about, "Republican Shelby Shuts Down Government"?
There should be a national debate and referundum on these two items to give the president power to enact such legislations before 2011. Then he is going to sail through for four more years.
He can do it. "Yes, he can."
Anything less is going to hurt us/US.
Unortunately, some of the Democrats are to far behind (Lieberman).