Kent Conrad Says That America is Run By The 'Senate" Is the House Listening?
(h/t Heather)
Did you know that the Congress is made up of only one elected body of representatives that crafts our legislation? I didn't know that. I thought we had two co-equal legislatures--a House and Senate.
Each of the 435 members of the House of Representatives represents a district and serves a two-year term. House seats are apportioned among the states by population. The 100 Senators serve staggered six-year terms. Each state has two senators, regardless of population. Every two years, approximately one-third of the Senate is elected at a time. Reelection rates for incumbents often exceed 90%.[1] Article I of the Constitution vests all legislative power in Congress. The House and Senate are equal partners in the legislative process (legislation cannot be enacted without the consent of both chambers)
But that's not what Kent Conrad told me on Fox News Sunday.
WALLACE: Senator Conrad, what do you expect to happen? Because now this isn’t the end of the process. It’s just another step in the “Perils of Pauline.”
What do you expect to happen in the House-Senate conference next month? After struggling for months to get Senate Democrats on board to accept this, what are you going to do for Democrats who have a bill which is considerably to the left of your bill?
CONRAD: I think any bill is going to have to be very close to what the Senate has passed because we’re still going to have to get 60 votes. And anybody who’s watched this process can see how challenging it has been to get 60 votes...
WALLACE: But to go back to the question of the conference, you’re saying that you don’t -- you can’t go further, that the House is basically going to have to accept -- the House is going to have to accept the Senate bill?
CONRAD: It is very clear that the bill, the final bill, to pass in the United States Senate is going to be -- have to be very close to the bill that has been negotiated here. Otherwise you will not get 60 votes in the United States Senate.
Kent Conrad is telling the House of Representatives to go "Cheney" themselves. Are Nancy Pelosi and the progressive members of Congress listening? I wrote this last week and Conrad just made my point for me.
How does the House feel after being rendered useless in 'Health Care Reform' by the Senate?
When the House and Senate committee members meet in conference and supposedly merge their bills, exactly what can they do to influence it at all? If the Senate bill is as far as the Gang of Four, or Six or Ten or whatever it is, are willing to go, then is the House bill nothing more than a stage prop?
Do members of the House of Representatives feel jubilation at the thought that any pieces of major legislation they are asked to put together will ultimately be decided by President Lieberman, Queen Snowe, Mary Landrone, Ben "floppy hair" Nelson and Max Baucus? I'm sure more names will be added to the list.
I really want to know how they feel.
The White House needs to understand that there are many progressive members of the House who will not vote for the Senate bill as it stands. When they meet up in conference there is supposed to be a compromise struck on the bill between both bodies. What Conrad, President Lieberman and the hairpiece known as Ben Nelson are telling 435 elected members of the HOR is that they don't matter.
Well I say to Conrad that he can "Cheney" himself -- and that's what the House should say.
I've never said to "kill the bill," as many are arguing liberals have been advocating like Howard Dean. But I do want to improve the Senate version of it and there's still time. I'm sorry that I do have some principles and want to keep on fighting. I always knew as liberals that we would be disappointed in the end, but it still can help millions of Americans in need of health care. And I would like my own premiums to stop being jacked up too.
Digby writes an excellent post that should be read in its entirety called "Clarifying Debate"
As for the internecine politics, there were numerous graceful concessions from the left from the beginning on health care that were not exactly easy to make, from single payer to the abortion language to immigrants. But it was the late dangling of a swap on the long held dream of a medicare buy-in, getting liberals to sign on and then allowing the loathed Lieberman, of all people, to capriciously snatch it away that was the real gut punch. And admonishing them to "get with the program" within minutes of that outrage while Lieberman preened that the president thanked him was gratuitous. Lucy and the football is an overused metaphor, but this was a classic. You'd have to be soulless not to be angry about that.
I'm glad Gov. Dean basically called John McCain is a damn liar after McCain spun his words into a bullshit Republican talking point. The conservative obstructionists in Congress only want to destroy health care reform for all Americans, and to me that borders on being a traitor the office they hold.
So it--you know, I respect John McCain, but it's, he wouldn't be the first person who twisted my words around and used them for something I had no intention of endorsing, which is the Republicans' behavior in this bill.
Nancy Pelosi can bring about some much needed improvement to the bill and I say go for it Nancy. Call Lieberman's bluff. If health care reform dies, it should be killed by the people who are destroying it, not by the people who have fought tooth and nail to reform a broken health-care system.
And America will know who they are.
Time to abolish the Senate. Screw these arrogant corrupt enforcers of corporate rule! F_ _ _ EM!!!
The Senate is totally useless and only obstructs useful legislation.
Republicans are liars and simply cannot be trusted.
How undemocratic is a system where the minority rule the majority? Yet that's what the American people have with the Senate, where states with minuscule populations like Wyoming and Alaska team up and overrule states like California, which has 33 million people! But each has only two senators!! Then the Senate gets to overrule the House, which DOES represent the American people by population? Unbelievable but true! The Senate should either be abolished, or Senators reassigned by population, i.e., each state gets at least one, but the other 50 are assigned by population. The Founding Fathers never envisioned such a disparity of population as we now have. We need a Constitutional Convention, ASAP!!
Actually you stated the reason why the Founding Fathers established both the Senate and the Electoral College that way. Smaller states were afraid their votes wouldn't mean anything if representation was based on their population.
That way if you ran for the Senate you ran through the whole state, not just more populous regions of that state, just like if you ran for president you would run through every state, not just the most powerful ones.
But the creation of the party system, which was almost immediate with the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists, the Democratic-Republicans and the Whigs, pretty much ended all that, and candidates conserved their strength by primarily running in those areas where they already showed strength, or a possibility of gaining strength.
Diabolus est Deus Inversus
It's actually quite interesting to look at the creation of the U.S. Senate in relation to the "evolution" of the Canadian Senate. The U.S. was lucky in the sense that, when the Senate was created, all of the states were roughy equivalent in size. ie-there was no California vs. Delaware situation, where people from the most populous state would get bent out of shape by not having more political power than the least populous state. If there had been a huge population disparity between the states, the odds are they wouldn't have been able to structure the Senate that way.
Canada has never had an elected Senate. The Senators are appointed (essentially) by the Prime Minister. The one thing that Canadians can all agree on is that they all hate that system, and want an elected Senate. The only problem is that the smaller provinces want to have representation equal to the larger ones (Ontario and Quebec), while the larger provinces want to have more power than the smaller ones. (And Quebec, of course, wants special status because of their different language, history, and origins.) In the quest for everybody to have special status in a hypothetical elected Canadian Senate, they've never been able to agree on anything, and after 40 years of talking about it, they still don't have an elected senate.
The only problem with "abolishing the Senate" is that annoying constitution gets in the way! WTF????
He addressed that with his last line about a Constitutional Convention. That's one of the constitutionally approved ways of starting an amendment drive, presumably to alter Article I.
The only problem is I don't know if we've ever had one since the Constitutional Convention that was started to redraw the Articles of Confederation, and ended up drafting the Constitution instead.
Of course this was addressing the points raised by Anais and not that bloviater 2XFOOLED and Fish, who must've flunked civics.
Diabolus est Deus Inversus
cause the wingnuts will insure we are a "christian nation" in the changes.
Damn. I knew there were consequences to allowing gay marriage in Vermont and losing that damn war against Xmas.
Did the Pope excommunicate the Queen or something. Surely the House of Lords will have something to say about this if they can get 60 votes to say anything.
“Why would anyone with a functioning brain believe this guy?”
Some guy with an eating disorder
Posting this thread only propagates the ignorance of our elected officials...and reveals to the world the fools we are.
Vote GOP and move forward to the 18th Century.
Must C&L remind me that Dick Cheney is still alive.
Vote GOP and move forward to the 18th Century.
Yes but it is kind of worth it to check the undisclosed locations for a corpse - someday soon . . .
*figuratively speaking of course*
"I know that there are people who do not love their fellow
man, and I hate people like that! " ~ Tom Lehrer (1928 - )
With all the government money wasted on Dick Cheney's health, maybe there is a legitimate reason for death panels.
Vote GOP and move forward to the 18th Century.
You're on to something there.
"I know that there are people who do not love their fellow
man, and I hate people like that! " ~ Tom Lehrer (1928 - )
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4WUUnc1M0TA
Diabolus est Deus Inversus
The senate is the most out of touch body in politics.
It is by design that they are all wealthy jerks and most of the ideology is just kabuki theater.
The bottom line is - we have to elect more progressive politicians in all slots. If we can get more and better progressives we will have more progressive and better policy.
It takes time and determination. Imagine the possibilities with even just a few more in both houses?
I think it is premature for anybody to throw in the towel as far a support goes. We've only had the WH for a year. What we need now is a HUGE wave of real progressive candidates to challenge the status quo and get elected to office. That would be the best message we could send Washington. I'd love to see the M$M try to spin sweeping wins against cons and colored canines.
(a guy can dream, eh)
"I know that there are people who do not love their fellow
man, and I hate people like that! " ~ Tom Lehrer (1928 - )
Mon, 12/21/2009 - 09:36 — Handypants
It is by design that they are all wealthy jerks and most of the ideology is just kabuki theater.
____________________________________________________________________
It's our version of the House of Lords,
But they won their position by primogeniture, not by being first past the post, until modern reforms.
The Roman Senate tended to be patrician as well.
Diabolus est Deus Inversus
that the bill should be outright killed! why do people keep saying this? there were some calling for the complete tabling of the bill, Dean was not among them. he did say that he personally wouldn't vote for the Senate version of the bill until it was improved. that's it.
That the senate bill should be killed and the house bill brought to that 51 vote thing I don't feel like tring to spell.
yeah...Dr. Dean is trusting the Democrats to fix this in reconciliation. Just as he trusted them when he allowed them to drop the public option.
Vote GOP and move forward to the 18th Century.
The house some how making this bill back into some grand reform. These senators have already made it clear that they will use every ounce of power they have to keep the bill the way it is. A corprate Written handout that is nothing more then a bailout to the Health Insurence companies.
Well I don't think it's the Senate or Congress...most certainly not The People and definitely not the President. I suppose if one followed the leash that is placed around the Presidents neck far enough you'd find out.
What the Hell, man!!! Dick Cheney is STILL alive?? That was funny L&P.
Government + the Federal Reserve = organized crime
When I here someone is Progressive it says they are to cowardly to be a Liberal. Naming the Liberals in Congress Progressive is insulting to those that support them.
Progressive are fence sitting fuckers that wouldn't stand up to the Republicans and renamed themselves so that they wouldn't be picked on.
Fuck that I am proud to be Liberal and Republicans can suck my ball sack if they don't like it!
"I know that there are people who do not love their fellow
man, and I hate people like that! " ~ Tom Lehrer (1928 - )
I'm proud to say I'm a "Liberal."
I say it every day.
Vote GOP and move forward to the 18th Century.
I just say I'm a Socialist.
Diabolus est Deus Inversus
I'm just an anarchist.
I'm an anarchist as well. Fuck the government.
humanist.
Hasa Diga Eebowai
. . . a Libeqrat. :)
Everyone is equally entitled to the pursuit of happiness. Wasn't that once self evident?
Unfortunately, President Obama has always put the Senate in the lead for this "reform" (gawd, even with the quotes that word rings so hollow). He was the one giving Baucus the bully pulpit, he was the one giving Lieberman the OK. He never focused on the House plans except to piss on them.
Nope, this belongs to Obama - and he can keep it. Sorry it'll be a "defeat," but better a defeat than the load o' crap that is about to become our Holiday present to big insurance.
The House is supposed to be the legislature, and, as such, where the buck stops, the one place that has showdown authority in our checked and balanced system, the ultimate authority. We know this was the Founders' intent, because they gave the House the sole power to originate appropriations, and money is that without which nothing happens in govt. Sure, the Senate has to approve laws as well, including those that appropriate money, and so the distinction intended by the Founders, that the House should run the govt, while the Senate oversees the president in his appointments to high federal office and diplomacy with foreign govts, was not sustained in practice. That Constitutional provision about where appropriations have to originate has become one of those provisions of the written document, that -- like the 2-yr limit on land forces that doesn't actually keep us from having a standing army -- are essentially dead letters, mere formalities.
The House could get its power back only by winning one of those games of legislative chicken, whereby they persist in stopping everything in govt by refusing to originate any appropriations that don't have riders paring the Senate and presidency back to their proper subservient positions. This, of course, will not happen. We have grown so used to responsibility not stopping anywhere in our govt, to no one being in charge of the govt, that all the folks in our society who might actually take it into their heads to seize power and take over the direction of things, have already found much more satisfactory employment as malefactors of great wealth. They can control the non-activity of our govt perfectly well from those commanding heights, and so have no need to lower themselves so far as to run for public offices that we have let become irrelevant. The principal isn't going to run for head of the Student Council.
..some much needed improvement..
You can't make me hold my breath on this one, John.
Nancy Pelosi is already wetting herself over the thought of having this hot potato thrown at her again.
She couldn't get the public option eliminated, so she cut a deal that got the bill out of the House and into Harry Reid's hands. With Sen. Lieberman's help he then gutted the legislation.
If I were the Dems, I'd be concerned with Pelosi blowing up this whole thing with her cowardice and incompetence.
Vote GOP and move forward to the 18th Century.
... who, in a conference call with bloggers, said that single payer (HR 676) couldn't be considered because it hadn't been scored? This was just a minute after she said she'd been a supporter of single payer for 30 years. Seems like three decades would be enough time to score a bill, but I understand she's only been Speaker for three fucking years.
Nancy Pelosi is one of the worst enemies of progressive issues. She pretends to be a progressive, thereby subsuming the left, then proceeds to eliminate the progressive position by taking it "off the table" and refusing to even debate it.
George Bush never had a better friend in congress; she gave him everything he wanted and single handedly stopped any investigation of his criminal regime. This is perhaps understandable as "looking forward and not back" is pretty much all she can do after so much botox.
With Pelosi "leading" any progressive fight, conservatives are assured that they've pretty much already won.
Corruption favors the wealthy.
Stock up now
Kentucky is pleased with their distinction.
Diabolus est Deus Inversus
And the Senate by rash limpballs
Who can't break a sweat
Without collapsing
And clutching his chest
Gasping.
Diabolus est Deus Inversus
...can they cut-off funding for the Senate? Of course all the Senate would have to do is for the members to tap into their 'off-shore' accounts, or have their 'other funders', aka Corporate America, simply deposit the money into a Senate operating slush fund, that way they wouldn't even need taxpayer dollars to keep them in the business of 'effin' up the country.
Think I've discovered why the Senate is as dysfunctional as it is...there are fewer of them to bribe than in the House, and Corporate American ain't no damn fool when it comes to protecting their top management's salaries and bonuses.
But the House controls funding only in the sense that appropriations have to originate in the House. An appropriations bill, like any other bill, can only become law with the Senate's concurrence. Whatever the Founders may have intended by the provision about where appropriations have to originate, in practice it's become one of the many dead letter provisions in the Constitution, a provision with no practical effect, because the Senate has got in the habit of being every bit as assertive over spending as the House, and since they have an effective veto in the matter, that habit is now in our unwritten constitution, the one we actually live by.
Sure, theoretically, the House could refuse to originate any appropriation for the Senate's operations, and it would have to meet under an oak tree or something, with no staff, no building, etc. I don't think they could stop there being some sort of pay for Senators, as I believe that the Constitution mentions pay for Senators. But, realistically, such assertiveness by any branch or entity of our govt would be, in effect, a revolution; something like calling the Estates General back into session after more than a century of hiatus.
They actually only need 51 votes to pass, right? The only reason that they need 60 is to overcome a filibuster. So let the GOP filibuster! Knock yourselves out, fellas. Show the world all the crazy crap you're willing to do to get your own way.
recent evolution of the senate which effectively gives a veto to every single senator can anyone seriously dispute Conrad's assertion? This may not be what the framers of the constitution intended but it's what you've got.
Hasa Diga Eebowai
The Senate rules. Fourth-branch Dick Cheney told me so.
Senate rules for 60-vote passage of bills corrupts the Constitutional rights of the House of Representatives.
It has created tyranny and extortion by not only a minority, but by one or two martinets.
The legislative rights of the House have been subverted.
It's unconstitutional.
Something needs to be done about it.
Call 1-800-Ass-4Hir and ask for Harry Reid.
Vote GOP and move forward to the 18th Century.
Each house gets to adopt its own rules of procedure. Cloture is a rule. It can be abolished by a simple majority.
“Why would anyone with a functioning brain believe this guy?”
Some guy with an eating disorder
child please
Conrad's right. Let's lower the filibuster threshold. Lieberman and Nelson should not get to hold good legislation hostage when the majority of the Democrats are willing to vote the way we want them to.
"So it--you know, I respect John McCain, but..."
So why is it you respect John McCain? Because he is not quite as sleezy and dishonest as some of the other Repubs? Because he was, and still is, gung ho for all wars that are draining this country? Because he can never admit a single mistake? Because he represents corporate America or because he chose Sara Palin for his VP?? Becuuse he was unfaithful to his wife and dumped her? Because he is on sunday talk shows almost every week? Maybe because he voted with Bush every time, huh? Or because.......
There is just a smug arrogance when I look at Lieberman, Conrad, Nelson, Landrieu and Lincoln. The idea our health care rights and access are controlled by these bought and paid for cretons is disgusting. But what disgusts me ever more is a President either too impotent to fight, or is no better than the senators I listed. My guess is he is the latter. He is bought and paid for too. When Obama spoke the words a "uniquely American solution to health care" I knew the fix was in then. Whenever you hear these words or something likening the American exceptionalism idea, you can bet that means strengthening the so-called free market system, and that is what this health care bill does. Making the private insurance market invincible doesn't inspire me to believe these people in the Senate and House leadership will comeback in a couple of years and "fix the problems". If there is a person out there naive enough to believe this, I have a snowball in hell waiting to sell you. WE ARE SCREWED PERIOD!!!
Don't be silly. There's not a single elected Democrat with the courage and integrity to try to stop this horrible bill.
They only work for the lobbyists, and House or Senate, they're only going to pass a bill that benefits the insurance and pharmaceutical industries.
I'm really enjoying deleting all emails I get from "progressive" democrats asking for donations. I've learned my lesson. There will never be another decent democrat elected as long as they're being funded by lobbyists.
Thanks to them, I'm doomed to spend the next dozen years until I'm eligible for medicare begging insurance companies to let me stay alive, while paying them 8 percent of my family's income, which we can't afford.
Thank you, President Obama. Thank you, Harry Reid. And mark my words, when the bill comes out of conference, it'll be a lot more Senate than House.
The Senate has gone mad. I know some people call for its abolition, and while it would be something I'm open to, I do think the Senate can be reformed. Actually, our whole government can (theoretically) be reformed.
It's time we seriously consider a Constitutional Convention for amending the entire way we do business here in the USA. Take away the veto power of the president, or at least require Constitutional reasons for a veto, reasons which Congress can challenge in the Supreme Court. Require that all bills begin in the House of Representatives. Convene the Senate only at the end of the year to review bills the House passed, and allow the House to override Senate objections in a manner similar to overriding a veto. And, of course, change our electoral system to consensual representation so that you are represented by someone for whom you voted, not someone who won an election in which you voted for someone else. That way, the Senate can still represent the states as entities, but everyone in the state will be represented.
I agree. And I can still hope, I suppose. I think the problem, though, is that calling Lieberman's bluff is actually calling Obama's bluff. Pelosi would have to be prepared to duke it out with Obama, and Obama would have to be willing to let Lieberman be the fall guy. I dont' really see that happening.
Everyone is equally entitled to the pursuit of happiness. Wasn't that once self evident?
Look at this arrogant little fucking weasel. Where the hell is he from? North Dakota? What's the population there? A couple of rednecks, a few hundred buffalo, horses and a some prairie dogs. Yet this little fucktard is telling the House - which truly represents the people, that they better eat the corporate fascist shit sandwich the Senate is passing or else? Man, these assholes are just begging for a revolt!
If I were a psychopath, I would join the republican party, and get in on the gravy train taking the Teabircher morons to the cleaners.
It just needs to get over its fear of filibusters.
It's pathetically stupid for the Senate leadership to constantly say "well, we HAVE to let ourselves be held to ransom by a tiny handful of blue dog Democratic Senators who won't vote for cloture unless we give them absolutely every little thing they want."
If the Republicans want to filibuster, LET THEM! They'll soon get tired of it. In fact, in the good old days the real horse trading and deal making used to take place DURING filibusters.
In 1964 the Dixiecrats tried to filibuster the Civil Rights Act. They stood on the Senate floor and read from the encyclopedia for 54 days. Meanwhile, WHILE they were filibustering, the Senate majority hammered out a compromise to get enough votes to get cloture. THAT'S THE WAY IT SHOULD BE DONE! You do your deal making DURING a filibuster, when peoples' urge to obstruct goes DOWN as their urge to go home and go to bed is going UP!
Ironically, the Senate changed its rules a few years ago to make filibustering EASIER. If a bill is being filibustered, the filibustering only goes on for half the day, in the morning. Then after lunch they proceed with normal Senate business and resume the filibustering the next day. Under those conditions the most LAZY ASSED senators in the world could filibuster a bill indefinitely.
If you want to filibuster, you should have to do it the old fashioned way! Standing on your feet, talking, until you drop from exhaustion! Let's see how long Mitch McConnell can do it that way!
The way it's done these days is they do the rangling and deal making for months in order to get 60 votes before the bill is even written. That's stupid. Go back to the old way. Put the goddamn bill on the floor and LET the Republicans filibuster it, and then, while they're bloviating on the Senate floor you can be working out compromises behind the scenes with both blue dog Democrats AND Republicans, both of whom will be getting tired of the filibuster.
Nicely done.
Corruption favors the wealthy.
Not only does Kent Conrad need to shut up immediately, he also needs to call himself a Republican immediately. He helped kill the public option - and, with it, REAL health care reform - in the Senate.
Can we Give this Guy his Own Committee?
We can call it the Dick Committee named after the other DICK.
Conrad has to GO!
corporations run both the house and the senate. period
Comments are closed on this entry