The Democrats Control Congress - Does it matter?

Last Fall, Democrats won enough seats to gain majorities in both the House and the Senate. In January, Rep. Nancy Pelosi took over as Speaker of the House and Harry Reid became Majority Leader in the Senate. As a result ___________. You fill in the blanks. I cannot.

True, there have been some minor victories such as an increase in the minimum wage. And Congress labored mightily on earmarks and lobbying reform, producing mice. True, the President was forced to accept benchmarks for Iraq before he ignored them. And General David Petraeus, the overall commander in Iraq, was forced to appear before Congress and present a slick sales job that gave members opportunities to make statements and avoid hard questioning. It is also true that major attempts to change course in Iraq and domestically (SCHIP) have been thwarted by Senate rules and Presidential vetoes. But on a whole, the results have been less than stellar and the public's opinion of Congress, Democrats and Republicans, reflects this.

To borrow a phrase, there is still time for the Democrats in Congress to be relevant. There are still two actions that could demonstrate intestinal fortitude and leadership. The most urgent is the confirmation of a new Attorney General Based on Congressional testimony to date. Judge Michael B. Mukasey is more dangerous to American democracy than was Alberto Gonzales. First, he is smarter - not a high hurdle - and more cagey than Gonzales. He can put together a coherent if terse answer. But his positions are frightening. When Gonzales was nominated, the key issues (torture, wiretapping, enforcing Congressional subpoenas, etc) were mostly theoretical. But now the issues are urgent and it appears that Judge Mukasey will support the same positions as Gonzales including that the President can ignore Congressional legislation. But his position will be stronger as he can claim to be coming from an "independent" position rather than as a long time flunky of the president. The torture issue is particularly ominous. He refused to state that water-boarding is torture as Senator John McCain and the military Judge Advocate Generals insist. Further, Mukasey appeared to say that he would give precedence to what officials in the field say they needed over the legal opinions of military lawyers. The Senate should not even consider the Mukasey nomination unless the latest torture policy memos are released to the Committee and Mukasey gives his legal opinion on them. True, the President can make a recess appointment. But Congress does not have to be compliant.

The second issue is, yet again, the war in Iraq. It is unlikely that enough Republicans will desert the President to force a change in course. The next best approach is to ensure that the costs of the war are not continually passed on to our children and grandchildren. Not a single dime of this war has been paid for. The entire cost, including the interest charges, has been debt funded. We rely on the Chinese, other Asian nations, Middle East countries and others to fund this credit card war. Rep. Obey's (D-Wis) proposal for a tax hike to pay for the war should be adopted by the Democrats in Congress. Every war supplemental should be accompanied by a tax to pay for it. The President should be told that he has the power to have his war. But Congress has the power to make him pay as he goes.

I believe that the nation, not just the Democratic Party will respond positively to both these expressions of leadership. They may represent the last chances for the country to see that Democratic control of Congress does make a difference.

Comments

[Pdubya]

let us stop complaining and use the system we have. Elected officials love to be re-elected, and pressuring them to sign bills still works. Doesn't mean we have to re-elect them if they pass a bill we want...like this one:

WRITE YOUR REPRESENTATIVES

http://www.americanfreedomcampaign.org/storage/afagenda/documents/AFA%20Act%20text.pdf

[Pdubya]

Strict line partisans seem these days to be holding on to some nostalgic form of trust in our elected officials, of either party.

When folks start to realize that it is the elite, largely, that make the rules, and that we need to take the carrot away from these corporate welfare elites by making hard lobby reforms...perhaps we'll get representative government back. And screw these congressional perks...thats more of my money...for what? The Dept of Education hasn't done anything for my children and I have no scud missile in my front yard.

Vote for a Statesman this election...There are still a few running.

[MistahCharleyPhD]

I don't agree with Mr. Klass. I have written the following open letter to the Congress, which you are invited to send to your own Representative and Senators, if you agree with it.

__________________

OUT OF IRAQ – WHATEVER IT TAKES – 2009 IS TOO LATE

Does it take cutting off the funds?

As I understand the Constitution, only Congress can authorize expenditures. No money for the war, no war. Bush can veto appropriation bills by himself, but he cannot pass them. So cut off the funds.

Does it take removing Bush and Cheney?

Apparently some think that Congress’s power of the purse is not enough to end the war, as long as the Bush/Cheney regime controls the Executive Branch. If that’s the case, then Congress should use its Constituti­onally-man­dated power to end the Bush/Cheney regime. You swore an oath to defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic. It seems clear that the Bush/Cheney regime (aggressive war based on lies; blatant and repeated violation of laws; torture; political corruption of the administration of justice; etc. etc. etc.) is not just too incompetent to continue in office – they are by intent, not just in effect, enemies of our Constitution.

If Bush and Cheney continue in office, they will probably attack Iran

The Bush/Cheney regime and their collaborators in the so-called “main stream” media (for example, David Ignatius’s Washington Post column of Oct. 7) are obviously preparing the public relations ground for this right now. Can any rational person doubt that such a course would be even more calamitous than the present war?

Do your duty

Every day this useless occupation goes on it kills people, and permanently maims more – many Americans and many more Iraqis (citizens of a country, by the way, THAT HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH THE 9/11 ATTACK). End the occupation NOW. Many human lives, and the future of our country, depend on it.

[Rescisco]

If, as the evidence suggests, the Democrat's have been a less than relevant majority, and if the will of the people matters not, it may be time to ask one central question. Who really is in charge here? Could it be that our democracy is an illusion? Could it be we have lost our Republic?

[OrvilleHLarson]

Mukasey's nomination should be defeated out of hand. He's a dangerous neofascist. Anyone nominated by the Liar-in-Chief is no friend of freedom.

The two (count 'em, two) parties are equally worthless, equally owned by the highest bidders.

Dr. Ron Paul for President.

[Shagnasty]

There is only one major party with two wings. Candidates from any truly second party would be laying out their plan to restore the balance of power in our government and to restore our civil rights to pre-Bu$hCo status.

[snaggster]

I do not agree that a tax would be welcomed and I am not talking about my personal opinion. When people voted for the Dems last year, they were not looking for ways to pay for the continued occupation of Iraq. We voted for an end to it. The Dems DO have the power to defund it and have made a CHOICE to continue to fund it. We can argue about why they chose that path, but it wasn't forced on them. While I believe it's a disgrace that Washington has chosen to defer payment to future generations, I don't hear much of anyone complaining about it (except here).

[PKM]

They need to start showing some courage. It will be very hard getting a veto-proof majority, and there's no guarantee the Democrats will win in 2008, although I think they will looking at things currently.

http://obamabarack.blogspot.com/

[chinohillster]

No.

And a big "NYAAAAH" to all of the "Nader-bashers" out there - y'all voted for DEMOCRATS last November - AND IT HASN'T MADE ONE BIT OF DIFFERENCE­!!!!!!!!!!­!!!!!!

"I am not altogether on anyone's side,
because no one is altogether on my side" -

Treebeard the Ent - "The Lord of the Rings"

A pox upon BOTH their houses - Democrats AND Republicans!

[Camel54]

How can the dems attach a tax to each spending bill when every responsible action they take is vetoed? As we recently learned, Americans love war even at the cost of a few thousand American lives, but cannot tolerate health care for children because of a few thousand whose parents make what republicans believe is too much money. Never mind the gross disparity on costs (in dollars), war wins. Add our hatred for taxes no matter how much good they can do and the Dems are just S.O.L.

I just don't see any possibility of doing anything right, anything ethical until we have a democratic president to go along with our democratic congress. Our system has developed such that if the other side wants it we don't. Period. Compromise alternates between meaning do it my way and acquiescence. If we can't convince people to support health care for children and in fact if the other side can make a villain out of a 12-year-old, what possibility is there for anything else to be done?