SOUNDBITES — “I have two reactions to the election in Massachusetts. One, I am disappointed. Two, I feel strongly that the Democratic majority in congress must respect the process and make no effort to bypass the electoral results. If Martha Coakley had won, I believe we could have worked out a reasonable compromise between the House and Senate health care bills. But since Scott Brown has won and the Republicans now have 41 votes in the senate, that approach is no longer appropriate. I am hopeful that some Republican senators will be willing to discuss a revised version of health care reform. Because I do not think that the country would be well served by the health care status quo. But our respect for democratic procedures must rule out any effort to pass a health care bill as if the Massachusetts election had not happened. Going forward, I hope there will be a serious effort to change the senate rule which means that 59 are not enough to pass major legislation, but those are the rules by which the health care bill was considered, and it would be wrong to change them in the middle of this process.” —Rep. Barney Frank, putting democracy above politics after the Massachusetts results, which is a noble move, but begs the question: Would the GOP ever adopt the same concession? (via)
Cam
If those selfish lobbyist pawns actually wanted to have a vote they could. Currently, what they call a fillibuster is just the other party saying they will do it, then voting on THAT bill is halted and all other business proceeds. If somebody threatens to fillibuster, then force them to fillibuster. Make them get down on the floor of the Senate and hold up all other business while they read out loud from the phone book. But the Dems won’t do that because they want to keep THEIR ability to fillibuster. As soon as the C-SPAN cameras have shots of people on the floor reading out their grandmothers recipi for Aprocot glaze, holding up all business just so they can block health care these fillibusters will be as unsuccessful as Stom Thurmonds was to block civil rights. The Dems need to step up to the plate. Don’t back down to the threat of a fillibuster, force them to put their money where their mouth is.
Republican
Neither party wants to give up the filibuster. Sure, the Senators will bitch and moan about it when in power, but as Cam points out, they want to have it available to them when they’re back in the minority, so they won’t actually do anything to eliminate it. It’s all a show.
Republican
And believe me, actually using the filibuster as intended would eventually lead to its demise. The Senators are way too lazy to spend their days listening to people ramble. Everyone knows it, so if you have the votes to filibuster, you have the votes. I don’t see the filibuster going away or a real filibuster being forced anytime soon.
Bryce
Barney is a pretty shrewd guy who looks at the big picture and the long haul.
Cam
No. 4 · Bryce said..
Barney is a pretty shrewd guy who looks at the big picture and the long haul.
__________________________________
Oh please, he’s been spouting the same crap for over a decade. he looks at what is best for Barney Frank.
Fitz
What’s missing, natch, is any kind of insight or at least a group mea culpa regarding the democratic obsession with appealing to the left for votes and money and then punting to the right as soon as possible. They don’t know HOW to be in charge, so it doesn’t matter if they are or aren’t in control of a super majority.
[email protected]
Barney Frank is a weasel who is really interested in re-electing Barney Frank.
What does the Democratic Party stand for anymore?
I guess nothing.
Brian NYC
Shut up Barney – you’re all self-serving weasels.