Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The 108th Congress: Sen. Daschle Is Still in the Driver's Seat
NewsMax ^ | 11/12/02 | Paul Weyrich

Posted on 11/11/2002 8:37:09 PM PST by Tumbleweed_Connection

So, Republicans will control the Senate (and the House) in the 108th Congress. And they may yet control the lame duck session of the 107th. For the moment, the Democrats will control the lame duck because the interim senator from Minnesota, Dean Barkley, has just announced that he will not join either party's caucus.

However, control should shift to the GOP when Senator-elect Jim Talent of Missouri (R) is seated. As a result, President George W. Bush is insisting that his Homeland Security bill be passed in the lame duck session.

Well and good.

But the White House needs to help the Senate GOP leadership to lower expectations for the new Congress. Soon-to-be Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle told NBC News that Democrats in the Senate are not going away and that they intend to do in the 108th Congress exactly what they did in the 107th Congress. That means one thing: Obstruction.

While a few Democratic senators such as Zell Miller of Georgia and Ben Nelson of Nebraska and perhaps from time to time John Breaux of Louisiana may want to cooperate with the Republicans, there is little doubt that Daschle will be able muster the 41 votes needed to filibuster key parts of the Bush agenda.

For all practical purposes, it takes 60 votes to pass contested matters through the Senate, and that is true no matter who controls. Then-Senate Minority Leader Bob Dole frustrated a number of the newly elected Bill Clinton's plans by a selected use of the 41 votes Republicans were able to put together in 1993.

It is much harder for an administration to explain why it can't produce when its party controls both houses of Congress. Bill Clinton could not explain why he and his Congress couldn't do better when they had to defend themselves before the electorate in 1994. They did manage to push through the largest tax increase in U.S. history by a one-vote margin in both the House and the Senate. Beyond that, Clinton didn't have much to show. The electorate punished the Democrats as never before.

So, once the president gets his Homeland Security bill through the Congress this year, the president should tell the public over and over again that 60 votes are needed to pass most anything in the Senate.

Since the election, I have read at least eight columns suggesting that now President Bush will be able to get his judicial nominations through the Senate. Not necessarily. The abortion rights crowd believes the Democrats owe them big time. They went all out to help Democrats such as Tim Johnson in South Dakota, and their payback will be the defeat of various judicial nominees.

There is strong pressure on the White House to re-nominate Judge Priscilla Owen and even Judge Charles Pickering. I don't disagree with that idea. But the White House and the Senate GOP leadership need to be prepared for the real possibility that the liberal Democrats will filibuster those nominations.

Senate rules are arcane. Most people don't understand them. The pompous Sen. Robert C. Byrd, D-W.V., has absorbed that fact and has been able to extract billions of taxpayer dollars for West Virginia just because he knows how to manipulate the rules. Who can explain this to the electorate?

Soon-to-be Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott made a deal with Sen. Daschle that, regardless of the outcome of the elections, the committee structure in the Senate wouldn't change for the lame duck session.

It is the kind of deal Lott is famous for. He gives things away to Daschle and gets nothing in return. Obviously, Lott didn't expect the Republicans to win back control of the Senate.

Now that the public has spoken and a majority of the electorate has chosen the Republicans for the Senate, the moral thing would be for Democrats to surrender control of the committees for the lame duck session. They won't do it.

Now we may see Lott as majority leader during the lame duck session (depending on what happens in Minnesota and Missouri), but because the committees will remain in the hands of the Democrats he will have almost no power.

And even in the 108th Congress, unless Lott and company can find 60 votes, if Daschle and his Democrats believe it will advance their cause to be obstructionist, it is clear that they are prepared to do so.

The perception will be that the GOP is now completely in control. The reality is that Daschle is still in the driver's seat. The sooner the president and Lott start to repeatedly call that to the attention of the American public the better.


TOPICS: Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 108congress; control; daschle

1 posted on 11/11/2002 8:37:09 PM PST by Tumbleweed_Connection
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Tumbleweed_Connection

Were they pulled from the committee?

2 posted on 11/11/2002 8:42:49 PM PST by deport
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tumbleweed_Connection
I wouldn't say Dasshole is in the drivers seat unless he's crossing a train track with the Republican Express closing in on him.

He's more of a student driving teacher with only a break on his side of the car.

3 posted on 11/11/2002 8:45:47 PM PST by for-q-clinton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: for-q-clinton
break = brake.
4 posted on 11/11/2002 8:46:29 PM PST by for-q-clinton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: deport
No they weren't pulled. The Democrats simply refused by a party-line vote to send their nominations to the Senate floor.
5 posted on 11/11/2002 8:47:10 PM PST by goldstategop
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Tumbleweed_Connection
Daschle is not in the driver's seat if Bush uses his bully pulpit.

Furthermore, I recall an article the other day where the Dems say they will cooperate with Bush (mostly).

So, I don't think that they will be fillibustering everything. However, if we get a SCOTUS retirement, they WILL fillibuster that sucker and we will have to fight like hell.
6 posted on 11/11/2002 8:49:47 PM PST by rwfromkansas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop
That's my point all they need to do is bring them back up and out of committee to the floor for a vote.
7 posted on 11/11/2002 8:52:01 PM PST by deport
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: rwfromkansas
Exactly. Everything hinges on how President Bush uses the pulpit. Clinton used it to bring republicans down after 1994 and Bush can use it to keep them on top even with Lott at the senate helm.
8 posted on 11/11/2002 8:54:03 PM PST by For the Unborn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Tumbleweed_Connection
Paul Weyrich is a pessimist who has not been helpful in recent years in advancing the conservative agenda. Bush has made tremendous strides by being forceful yet respectful toward his opponents. That doesn't mean giving in, but rather being wise on how you build your strategy and win. He assumes a defeatist attitude on the Homeland Security and upcoming judicial appointments. Bush is a an exceptional leader who inspires confidence. He smiles as he gives the dems enough rope to hang themselves. He radiates this confidence and determination to Lott. Let the dems be obstructionist and you may very well see Nelson and Miller on our team soon, and some very frightened dem senators, Daschle especially, looking forward to a scary reelection fight in '04.
9 posted on 11/11/2002 8:55:44 PM PST by untwist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tumbleweed_Connection

There is one slightly quicker way to get things through the Senate than waiting until 2004 to try to win 60 seats. It won't work on everything, but it will work on some things, and more of Bush's agenda will pass with it than without it.

That is to replace the totally spineless and worthless Mr. Lott with someone who understands how to negotiate with Democrats. "Negotiate" means bargain with. One hopes to walk away from a negotiation better off than before... having given something up, but also having gained something else. As pointed out here, this is not Lott's way. Lott's method is to simply give in to the other side, and gain nothing in return. He did this continuously during his previous stint as majority leader, to the point that Daschle was running the agenda. This will happen again, unless Lott is replaced.

I am hopeful that Bush and Rove know this; that Bush's re-election effort in 2004 will depend to some degree on his success at implementing his agenda... something that cannot and will not happen with Trent Lott as Senate Majority Leader. I am hopeful that they are whispering in the right ears now, so that this debacle can be avoided, sooner rather than later.


10 posted on 11/11/2002 9:03:57 PM PST by Nick Danger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tumbleweed_Connection
I guess the Demorats gave up on their use of "bi-partisanship", not that they ever had any to begin with.
11 posted on 11/11/2002 9:56:42 PM PST by PatrioticAmerican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: untwist
"Paul Weyrich is a pessimist who has not been helpful in recent years in advancing the conservative agenda."

You have a gift for understatement. Last time I heard Weyrich speak, he gave a perfect impersonation of Marvin the Paranoid Android. He counseled nothing but retreat. I was disgusted.

12 posted on 11/11/2002 11:43:54 PM PST by Bonaparte
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson