In The Blogs

Quote of the Day - 3.17.09

| Tue Mar. 17, 2009 8:50 PM PDT

From Sen. Judd Gregg (R–NH), on the possibility of using the budget reconciliation process to pass healthcare and cap-and-trade bills in the Senate:

"That would be the Chicago approach to governing: Strong-arm it through. You're talking about the exact opposite of bipartisan. You're talking about running over the minority, putting them in cement and throwing them in the Chicago River."

Hell yes. This is supposed to be a democracy. Why, allowing legislation to pass based on nothing more than a simple majority vote would be just this side of mob rule.

Advertisement

Kevin Drum is a political blogger for Mother Jones. For more of his stories, click here.

Comments

So what ?

Submitted by daCascadian (not verified) on Tue Mar. 17, 2009 10:28 PM PDT.

Judd Gregg >"...You're talking about running over the minority, putting them in cement and throwing them in the Chicago River." Uh, yea. So what ? That is, after all, where they belong. "...This is not a game." - Lorie Van Auken (2001.09.11 widow)

サーバー管理

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Tue Mar. 17, 2009 11:42 PM PDT.

We hope Wakata's prolonged stay will produce the expected results. Wakata will also carry out some fun experiments based on questions sent in by the public, such as "Can you do push-ups in outer space?" and "How do you use eye drops in weightlessness?" One experiment will involve the creation of art in zero gravity. We hope these projects will stimulate children's curiosity. The mammoth project will cost Japan about 1 trillion yen,サーバー管理 including 550 billion yen to construct Kibo and 40 billion yen a year to run the ISS. However, the future of the ISS remains uncertain. After completing the space station next year, the United States intends to retire its aging space shuttle fleet and start concentrating fully on moon and Mars missions

goose & gander

Submitted by Govt Skeptic (not verified) on Wed Mar. 18, 2009 4:41 AM PDT.

How is gaming the system by using budget reconciliation rules any different from abusing filibusters to effectively require Senate legislation to pass with a 60 vote supermajority? The former is simply the predictable result of the latter. Grow up Judd Gregg.

Consistent, at least

Submitted by penalcolony (not verified) on Wed Mar. 18, 2009 4:43 AM PDT.

" . . . allowing legislation to pass based on nothing more than a simple majority vote would be just this side of mob rule." Similarly, Gregg is resigning from the Senate rather than subject himself to "mob rule" next year.

This is standard fare from

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Wed Mar. 18, 2009 6:02 AM PDT.

This is standard fare from the Republicans. If you are in the minority, whine about lack of "bipartisanship." If you are in the majority, shut out the minority on the grounds that you have a mandate from the people. I only get pissed with the media for pretending to (or worse, actually) take this seriously. An honest media would just brush that aside in a sentence: "As expected, Republicans complain of being 'shut out.' And in other news..."

I agree--this is not

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Wed Mar. 18, 2009 3:07 PM PDT.

I agree--this is not news...it is old hat. Move on.

HYPOCRITE

Submitted by Andy (not verified) on Wed Mar. 18, 2009 6:14 AM PDT.

The Republicans made ample use of the budget reconciliation rules when they controlled Congress - the Bush tax cuts were all passed via budget reconciliation (that' why they're temporary and expire after 10 years) - I don't remember hearing Gregg doing much complaining about it then. HYPOCRITE

yeah and Republican input

Submitted by Arachnae on Wed Mar. 18, 2009 6:35 AM PDT.

yeah and Republican input during this crisis has been so USEFUL, too. No wonder they're wounded at being shut out. heh.

I seem to remember a lot of

Submitted by Davis X. Machina (not verified) on Wed Mar. 18, 2009 7:12 AM PDT.

I seem to remember a lot of GOP senators jumping up and down babbling about a 'nuclear option' and 'up-and-down votes' not very long ago.

You're talking about running

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Wed Mar. 18, 2009 8:10 AM PDT.

You're talking about running over the minority, putting them in cement and throwing them in the Chicago River.

...Must... resist... image of Colman giving Franken cement shoes while Franken says to a judge: sure, no, I understand, no, I guess next month is fine too.

Puh-Lease!

Submitted by Pi Is Exactly Three! (not verified) on Wed Mar. 18, 2009 8:24 AM PDT.

While it's an obvious truism that republicans care nothing for bipartisanship (except when they're in the minority), I think there's a kind of logic to their constant whining & wailing. Viz: - Obama has a bill he wants to pass. Obama has asked for republican input (a courtesy repubs have never accorded their opponents). - Republicans come back with a list of demands, plus some crazy shit (purposely thrown in) that no-one in their right mind would agree to. - Obama agrees to a number of these items, but because he didn't agree to every last goddam thing, including the crazy shit, this is unacceptable to the republicans. - Since the repub's definition of bipartisanship doesn't include compromise (on their part), Obama is being partisan by not completely capitulating to the minority party. - Obama has consistantly touted a bipartisan philosophy, but given these events, clearly he's a partisan & therefore has been lying. What else has he been lying about? Can we even trust the guy? - Various news orgs & bloviators pick up this meme & carry it further down the road, thereby creating public mistrust of Obama & any policy he might try to enact in the future. Rinse & repeat. Thing is, I don't really begrudge the repubs their constant whining hypocrisy anymore than I would begrudge a fox for stealing a hen's eggs. It's what they do. It's their nature. Besides, I don't think it's a particularly winning tactic -- 24/7 whining & cries of victimization will wear pretty thin over the long run.

Majority rule!

Submitted by MarkH on Wed Mar. 18, 2009 1:12 PM PDT.

Republicans argued for less regulation and now they say Obama isn't controlling AIG and the TARP funds sufficiently. Republicans say they want Obama's policies to fail, but they want HIM to succeed. Repub Gregg says majority rule is dangerous (paraphrasing). Will he call for a majority vote in the Senate for a Resolution stating that? Republicans say lots of things. I suppose what they oppose is the place holder values which Orszag has given for health care reform and Cap & Trade. If those bils pass (as they probably will) the Repubs definitely will want them pared back to near meaningless. Republicans say "No no no no no no no."

Tyranny of the Majority

Submitted by QMF (not verified) on Wed Mar. 18, 2009 2:10 PM PDT.

"You're talking about running over the minority, putting them in cement and throwing them in the Chicago River." I'm waiting for Senator Gregg to come to the aid of Californian gays and lesbians whose rights were denied them by a majority of voters. Or could it be that the Senator is only concerned with minority rights when his party is in the minority in the Senate?

Almost half the US voters

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Thu Mar. 19, 2009 2:24 AM PDT.

Almost half the US voters voted Republican. Yes, Kevin, stripping those citizens' representatives of all political power in the Federal Government is undemocratic.