The Democrats were bluffing, and we should have called them on it.
We pay a cumulative price for these retreats (not "compromises").
The rationale behind the Democrats demands was that they felt they shouldn't have to give up a lot of the ground won in Trent Lott's funding surrender in 2001. That was their beachhead for this advance.Democrats said that traditional committee funding ratios, where the minority got as little as one-third of the money going to each committee, was no longer relevant in light of the last Congress when the funds were divided nearly equally.
I'll grant you that point, but let's face it, this is also all about the Rats putting forward a coordinated attempt to roll a brand-new, inexperienced Senate Majority Leader. This all started on the session's opening day, with the Hillary/Daschle/Byrd move to renege on the deal struck to extend unemployment benefits. This kind of thing is going to be a constant fact of life for as long as the Rats feel they can get away with it, and we have to hope that Sen. Frist gets wise to the workings of the SML post very quickly.
It definitely sucks that we had to compromise, but one good thing is that the Rats will always overplay their hands with these petty partisan brinksmanship games. With some luck, this could help us to clean their clocks in '04, and then Mr. Frist can revisit this little deal from a position of much greater strength.